PDA

View Full Version : How did I2a-Din get to the Balkans?



Pages : 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

mihaitzateo
29-03-15, 21:18
Did anyone noticed that if you do not take into consideration North Russia,all Slavic speaking areas and Romania (which have the language cleansed of Slavic origin words,in the name of Latinism) have significant percentages of I2-din?
There is main stream theory,that Slavic speakers came around 600 AD.
Question is,how is possible to explain some common folk customs seen at Romanians at all Slavs,like welcoming someone with bread and salt?
Other question,why Hutsuls are bearing in such high percentage I2-din?
And they have a typical Vlach look.
They speak some kind of Ukrainian.
Maybe initially I2-din people spread from Balkans and Romania to North,West and East and spread a language,that has some words common to today Slavic and some cultural things.
After,most of these people were conquered by Baltic speakers and so we got the language closed to today Slavic language.
R1-Z280 seems to be of Baltic origins,there is another R1A,M458 or so,which has the maximum in Poland,which seems to be also associated with Slavic people.
I do not know what these people I2-din were,I do not think they were Thraco-Dacians,most probable is that Thraco-Dacians were mostly bearing R1b-ht35.
Something that could come as a proof to sustain this theory will be to calculate the distance between today Latvian and Lithuanian to:
Russian,Polish,Belarussian,Ukrainian,Serbo-Croatian,Czech and Slovak languages,Bulgarian language.
I have the strange impression that Latvian and Lithuanian are closest to Polish language.
Anyway,if South Slavic languages are most further away from Latvian and Lithuanian,this theory,with Baltic people conquering the proto-Slavic people and form the actual Slavic language,will make a lot of sense.

Romanian have a few cognates with Lithuanian,which are not seen in any other Indo-European language.

Sile
29-03-15, 22:39
Did anyone noticed that if you do not take into consideration North Russia,all Slavic speaking areas and Romania (which have the language cleansed of Slavic origin words,in the name of Latinism) have significant percentages of I2-din?
There is main stream theory,that Slavic speakers came around 600 AD.
Question is,how is possible to explain some common folk customs seen at Romanians at all Slavs,like welcoming someone with bread and salt?
Other question,why Hutsuls are bearing in such high percentage I2-din?
And they have a typical Vlach look.
They speak some kind of Ukrainian.
Maybe initially I2-din people spread from Balkans and Romania to North,West and East and spread a language,that has some words common to today Slavic and some cultural things.
After,most of these people were conquered by Baltic speakers and so we got the language closed to today Slavic language.
R1-Z280 seems to be of Baltic origins,there is another R1A,M458 or so,which has the maximum in Poland,which seems to be also associated with Slavic people.
I do not know what these people I2-din were,I do not think they were Thraco-Dacians,most probable is that Thraco-Dacians were mostly bearing R1b-ht35.
Something that could come as a proof to sustain this theory will be to calculate the distance between today Latvian and Lithuanian to:
Russian,Polish,Belarussian,Ukrainian,Serbo-Croatian,Czech and Slovak languages,Bulgarian language.
I have the strange impression that Latvian and Lithuanian are closest to Polish language.
Anyway,if South Slavic languages are most further away from Latvian and Lithuanian,this theory,with Baltic people conquering the proto-Slavic people and form the actual Slavic language,will make a lot of sense.

Romanian have a few cognates with Lithuanian,which are not seen in any other Indo-European language.

Customs do not change because the slavic language came into romania/balkans.........................if romania adopted english as a language , you will still retain romanian customs

Tomenable
30-03-15, 15:51
Question is,how is possible to explain some common folk customs seen at Romanians at all Slavs,like welcoming someone with bread and salt?

Welcoming with bread and salt was also a very old custom in Poland - here the wedding of Mieszko I and Doubravka in year 965 AD:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSVaq8gqQfQ#t=170


I have the strange impression that Latvian and Lithuanian are closest to Polish language.

Yes. Lithuanian and Latvian languages had a lot of Polish loanwords and other Polish linguistic influences.

Lithuania and Latvia were parts of Rzeczpospolita for many centuries and have been under strong Polish cultural influence.

There have also been very numeous and influential Polish minorities in both Lithuania and southern Latvia.

===================================

Ethnic composition of Ilūkste District and town of Grīva in 1919 (in south-eastern Latvia):

Poles = 9207 = 53.13%
Russians = 5068
Latvians = 1396 = 8.06%
Belarusians = 1273
Lithuanians = 251
Jews = 134

Total = 17329

Polish minority in Latvia has been concentrated in south-eastern regions, historically known as Polish Livonia and Courland.

Polish, Swedish, Danish and Russian zones of influence in Latvia and Estonia from the 1500s to the 1700s:

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/eceurope/liv1561.gif

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/eceurope/liv1582.gif

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/eceurope/liv1630.gif

http://www.zum.de/whkmla/histatlas/eceurope/liv1721.gif

mihaitzateo
30-03-15, 17:08
Tormenable, I am not arguing with you anymore,until I do not see measured the distance between all Slavic languages and Latvian and Lithuanian.
If you will see that Polish is closest to Lithuanian and Latvian and 2nd close is Russian and Bellarussian and you still insist that it was Poles and Russians who influenced Latvian and Lithuanian,than is just lol mode.

Tomenable
30-03-15, 18:00
Check how many Russians live in Latvia nowadays.

Upper and middle class in Lithuania spoke Polish for centuries.

Lithuanian language in the 1800s was a language of peasants.

mihaitzateo
30-03-15, 23:07
Check how many Russians live in Latvia nowadays.

Upper and middle class in Lithuania spoke Polish for centuries.

Lithuanian language in the 1800s was a language of peasants.
Lol,really!
This is why Rurik&co were mostly N1C1 and were Baltic people who moved to Scandinavia and adopted Norse language.
You are living in a dream,together with other lol-mode Slavic speakers who think Slavs were some great warriors.
Go read a little about Samo,all Slavic speakers were conquered by few Turkic Avars ,Samo gave them swords to beat Avars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samo
Now,a race of warriors who do not even know to forge for themselves swords,is not possible.

Tomenable
31-03-15, 12:27
Learn some history man. What you write is funny.

BTW I wasn't talking about Slavs, but about Poles.

Tomenable
31-03-15, 13:04
Now,a race of warriors who do not even know to forge for themselves swords

Swords were very expensive and relatively rare weapons during the Dark Ages.

Spears and axes were more widespread and more popular. As well as bows and javelins.

In the 600s the best quality swords in Christian Europe were made by swordmakers from Rhineland.

Not only Slavs but also Scandinavians were buying those swords from smugglers like Samo.

The Frankish Empire tried to prevent the export of their swords to foreign countries.

Tomenable
31-03-15, 13:17
Below is the list of some of Slavic chieftains in their conquest of the Balkans:

Ardagast, Musocius, Peiragast, Dauritas, Boz, Dabragezas, Kelagast, Chilbudius and others:

http://www.jassa.org/?p=915

mihaitzateo
01-04-15, 10:14
Below is the list of some of Slavic chieftains in their conquest of the Balkans:

Ardagast, Musocius, Peiragast, Dauritas, Boz, Dabragezas, Kelagast, Chilbudius and others:

http://www.jassa.org/?p=915

Most of these "Slavic" chieftains names sounds like Baltic names,lol.
I know for sure that at least one dinasty of the so called "Bulgarian empire" were Vlachs - Asen dinasty .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asen_dynasty

Melancon
02-04-15, 13:58
I see. I haven't really seen any study done on our mtDNA so far, but I think we sort of are in between just like with y-dna, but lot more diverse. With people I share on 23andme, this is what they have for mtDNA: H, H5a, H7, H9a, H11a, H12, H13a2, J1c, J1c3, J1c2, U5a1a, U4c1, U1a3,, W, W1. I share with another fella that has R0a1a, and I was told that this subclade peaks on Tuscany, Italy.Thanks for the information; I will try to do some digging around when I get the time.

I will report back on my findings; if I find anything significant.

Rethel
02-04-15, 14:18
Most of these "Slavic" chieftains names sounds like Baltic names,lol.


Maybe for someone, who don't have any idea about slavic languages...

Melancon
02-04-15, 15:10
I see. I haven't really seen any study done on our mtDNA so far, but I think we sort of are in between just like with y-dna, but lot more diverse. With people I share on 23andme, this is what they have for mtDNA: H, H5a, H7, H9a, H11a, H12, H13a2, J1c, J1c3, J1c2, U5a1a, U4c1, U1a3,, W, W1. I share with another fella that has R0a1a, and I was told that this subclade peaks on Tuscany, Italy.And these are all Albanian people, right? Not of any other ethnicity?

Hmm, I did an amateur (unprofessional) study right now and it seems that most of these mitochondrial subclades that you gave me originated from the Near East. (Caucasus region).

One of them was found at a high frequency in an old Neolithic culture from Ukraine. (Northeast of Albania). Some of them seem to be pre-Italo-Celtic culture. (Northwest of Albania). Which may explain a little bit of Illyrian DNA. (if Albanians' aren't the Illyrians)


It seems like the Albanians may have been a crossroads population of sorts; but are still very homogeneous, since the admixture. How odd. Some Albanians might not like this analysis of mine; but from my own observations of the mtdna that you gave me, these mtdna haplogroups of Albanian women seem to have originated in the East. (pre-Indo-Iranians and pre-Slavic cultures carried these the most.)

Could it be, perhaps...that the pre-Albanians were originally a Caucasian (originating from the Caucasus) Neolithic culture; that migrated into the Balkans? Etruscans were mythologically rumored to have migrated from Anatolia, as reported by the Greeks. Which may explain some of the mutual, although small genetic relations with Italians and Albanians. What is very interesting; is that Anatolian peoples (Turks) as well as Italians and Albanians have a higher than average amount of Y-DNA J2.

I am thinking Albanians, based on this female mtdna; may be related to Thracians or Indo-Iranians or something similar; but there does seem to be the possibility of a small Southern Central European (Illyrian?) contribution.

Maybe Illyrians and Thracians were related to each other? If Y-DNA E-V13 is indigenous to the Balkans ... then that must mean there definitely was a migration of Near Eastern/Caucasian people into the region of Albania at some point.

From my findings; it seems both the Mitochondrial DNA that you gave me; and the Y-DNA in Albanians both seem to have originated from the Near East or Eastern Europe. There was probably a migration of E-V13 men from the Near East in the early Neolithic; and then later a migration of foreign Indo-European peoples from either Eastern Europe, Anatolia or Southern Russia; assimilating during the Bronze Age. (R1b, J2 etc) Both cultures mixed and assimilated. But the original language of the Neolithic (indigenous) peoples was replaced by Indo-European, as I speculated earlier.

I'm sorry if this wasn't helpful enough. I really really need more mtdna subclades and research into this.

Garrick
02-04-15, 22:55
From my findings; it seems both the Mitochondrial DNA that you gave me; and the Y-DNA in Albanians both seem to have originated from the Near East or Eastern Europe. There was probably a migration of E-V13 men from the Near East in the early Neolithic; and then later a migration of foreign Indo-European peoples from either Eastern Europe, Anatolia or Southern Russia; assimilating during the Bronze Age. (R1b, J2 etc) Both cultures mixed and assimilated. But the original language of the Neolithic (indigenous) peoples was replaced by Indo-European, as I speculated earlier.


Dr. Marika Butskhrihidze (2013) find similarities between Armenian and Albanian. She is not the only one, yet in 1906 H. Pederson noted closeness these languages, after him Pisani (1950), Kortlandt (1980) and other authors.

Butskhrihidze notes:

"I can at least tell you about remarkable similarities,I found between Albanian and Armenian. This is how it all started."

"What I was not expecting though is to find myself bursting aloud every 5 minutes “yes,the same word in Albanian has similar meaning!” At the end of the very first class,I have noticed I really annoyed Prof. Russell.He quietly uttered though: “yes,there are similarities between Armenian and Albanian”, without adding any extra comment."

According to Butskhrihidze:

"Many lexical correspondences are scattered in various papers and etymological dictionaries...
There are many more lexical correspondences awaiting further in - depth analysis."

...
My opinion that Albanian language has its origin in the Caucasus. Basically, probably it is the language R1b-ht35 carriers - Armenian haplotype.

Of course, E-V13 carriers had own language, and that language was probably Afro-Asiatic.

Somewhere (Caucasus, South Russia, Ukraine, Moldavia, East Romania) R1b-ht35 Armenian and E-V13 carriers are connected.

It is interesting, today in Albanian can still be found Afro-Asiatic words. That was the reason why some researchers have sought a connection between the Albanian and the Egyptian (Coptic) and other Afro-Asiatic languages.

But probably language of R1b-ht35 carriers became dominant, and Afro-Asiatic words remained to a lesser degree.

Of course, later, this language was under the influence of Dacian, Romanian (East Latin), Russian and other Slavic languages. And other carriers of haplogroups entered in population.

In Albanian there are few Greek words, as ancestors of Albanians, who probably lived from southern Russia to the east Romania, could come into contact only with Greek colonists in the north and east Black sea, but not with the Balkan Greeks.

There are more interesting things in Albanian. For example, there is a similarity in the accent some Albanian and Russian words. Earlier I wondered why the Albanian and Russian sometimes sounding similar.

Ancestors of Albanians were able to have contacts with Dacians and Thracian tribes around some areas near to Black sea. But much less likely with the Thracians deeper in the Balkans, and not to Illyirians.

Illyrian is CENTUM.

Albanian is SATEM (as Armenian, Russian, Dacian etc.). Latin in Albanian came from Romanian, in the east, not Latin directly from the west.

Because ancestors of Albanians probably lived somewhere between South Russia and East Romania, it is logical that Albanian has no similarity with Illyrian.

But it it has closeness with Armenian, and (later impacts) Dacian, Romanian (Latin), Slavic, etc. In Albanian there are Afro-Asiatic words (probably from original language of E-V13 carriers) etc.

...
Why is this important to say in the topic about I2a-Din and Balkans. Because, Balkan peoples are significantly I2a carriers,

Geg Albanians have at least I2a haplogroup in the Balkans (much less than the Greeks, not to speak of Romanians, Serbs, Bosniacs, Croats, etc...).

Illyrians and Thracians (and Dacian, of course) probably were significantly I2a carriers and today Balkan population largely comes from them, and much less from Goths, Celts, Slavs etc. although they are certainly contributed.

For me the most interesting question is which was the original I2a and earlier I language. First Balkan language, the language of hunters-gatherers was language of I carriers. Where we can search the language? My opinion is maybe in Sardinia (Nuragic?), or even Iberia. I'd like to hear any idea, it's probably not easy and carries speculation but to try.

Skerdilaidas
03-04-15, 09:51
And these are all Albanian people, right? Not of any other ethnicity?

Hmm, I did an amateur (unprofessional) study right now and it seems that most of these mitochondrial subclades that you gave me originated from the Near East. (Caucasus region).

One of them was found at a high frequency in an old Neolithic culture from Ukraine. (Northeast of Albania). Some of them seem to be pre-Italo-Celtic culture. (Northwest of Albania). Which may explain a little bit of Illyrian DNA. (if Albanians' aren't the Illyrians)


It seems like the Albanians may have been a crossroads population of sorts; but are still very homogeneous, since the admixture. How odd. Some Albanians might not like this analysis of mine; but from my own observations of the mtdna that you gave me, these mtdna haplogroups of Albanian women seem to have originated in the East. (pre-Indo-Iranians and pre-Slavic cultures carried these the most.)

Could it be, perhaps...that the pre-Albanians were originally a Caucasian (originating from the Caucasus) Neolithic culture; that migrated into the Balkans? Etruscans were mythologically rumored to have migrated from Anatolia, as reported by the Greeks. Which may explain some of the mutual, although small genetic relations with Italians and Albanians. What is very interesting; is that Anatolian peoples (Turks) as well as Italians and Albanians have a higher than average amount of Y-DNA J2.

I am thinking Albanians, based on this female mtdna; may be related to Thracians or Indo-Iranians or something similar; but there does seem to be the possibility of a small Southern Central European (Illyrian?) contribution.

Maybe Illyrians and Thracians were related to each other? If Y-DNA E-V13 is indigenous to the Balkans ... then that must mean there definitely was a migration of Near Eastern/Caucasian people into the region of Albania at some point.

From my findings; it seems both the Mitochondrial DNA that you gave me; and the Y-DNA in Albanians both seem to have originated from the Near East or Eastern Europe. There was probably a migration of E-V13 men from the Near East in the early Neolithic; and then later a migration of foreign Indo-European peoples from either Eastern Europe, Anatolia or Southern Russia; assimilating during the Bronze Age. (R1b, J2 etc) Both cultures mixed and assimilated. But the original language of the Neolithic (indigenous) peoples was replaced by Indo-European, as I speculated earlier.

I'm sorry if this wasn't helpful enough. I really really need more mtdna subclades and research into this.
Those are just random samples from people I share on 23andme, so we don't know how common they are, and I agree that in order to pull out a theory and get a clear picture, one needs to really have an extensive project on all regions where Albanians inhabit. Anyway, most of those mtDNA are also common in the rest of Europe, so nothing really particular or distinct to Albanians, except maybe few.

Also, this is just my two cents, I don't think mtDNA is of much use on determining our backgrounds. Y-dna in other hand is much more useful when one considers our traditions; marriages are not allowed within the Clan no matter how far the generation goes, and also within villages, even if the village is composed of different Clans; they swore brotherhoods, and such bonds also restricted marriages. So this of course obligated Clans to seek for their brides as far as possible from their territories they controlled, and there were cases when young man wondered very far, as far as Black Sea, to steal brides when there were in war with other Clans. Kelmendi were recorded to have gone that far for such a purpose when they were in war with all other North Albanians Clans, hence why I mentioned that we probably are lot more diverse on mtDNA.

Skerdilaidas
03-04-15, 09:52
Dr. Marika Butskhrihidze (2013) find similarities between Armenian and Albanian. She is not the only one, yet in 1906 H. Pederson noted closeness these languages, after him Pisani (1950), Kortlandt (1980) and other authors.

Butskhrihidze notes:

"I can at least tell you about remarkable similarities,I found between Albanian and Armenian. This is how it all started."

"What I was not expecting though is to find myself bursting aloud every 5 minutes “yes,the same word in Albanian has similar meaning!” At the end of the very first class,I have noticed I really annoyed Prof. Russell.He quietly uttered though: “yes,there are similarities between Armenian and Albanian”, without adding any extra comment."

According to Butskhrihidze:

"Many lexical correspondences are scattered in various papers and etymological dictionaries...
There are many more lexical correspondences awaiting further in - depth analysis."

...
My opinion that Albanian language has its origin in the Caucasus. Basically, probably it is the language R1b-ht35 carriers - Armenian haplotype.

Of course, E-V13 carriers had own language, and that language was probably Afro-Asiatic.

Somewhere (Caucasus, South Russia, Ukraine, Moldavia, East Romania) R1b-ht35 Armenian and E-V13 carriers are connected.

It is interesting, today in Albanian can still be found Afro-Asiatic words. That was the reason why some researchers have sought a connection between the Albanian and the Egyptian (Coptic) and other Afro-Asiatic languages.

But probably language of R1b-ht35 carriers became dominant, and Afro-Asiatic words remained to a lesser degree.

Of course, later, this language was under the influence of Dacian, Romanian (East Latin), Russian and other Slavic languages. And other carriers of haplogroups entered in population.

In Albanian there are few Greek words, as ancestors of Albanians, who probably lived from southern Russia to the east Romania, could come into contact only with Greek colonists in the north and east Black sea, but not with the Balkan Greeks.

There are more interesting things in Albanian. For example, there is a similarity in the accent some Albanian and Russian words. Earlier I wondered why the Albanian and Russian sometimes sounding similar.

Ancestors of Albanians were able to have contacts with Dacians and Thracian tribes around some areas near to Black sea. But much less likely with the Thracians deeper in the Balkans, and not to Illyirians.

Illyrian is CENTUM.

Albanian is SATEM (as Armenian, Russian, Dacian etc.). Latin in Albanian came from Romanian, in the east, not Latin directly from the west.

Because ancestors of Albanians probably lived somewhere between South Russia and East Romania, it is logical that Albanian has no similarity with Illyrian.

But it it has closeness with Armenian, and (later impacts) Dacian, Romanian (Latin), Slavic, etc. In Albanian there are Afro-Asiatic words (probably from original language of E-V13 carriers) etc.

...
Why is this important to say in the topic about I2a-Din and Balkans. Because, Balkan peoples are significantly I2a carriers,

Geg Albanians have at least I2a haplogroup in the Balkans (much less than the Greeks, not to speak of Romanians, Serbs, Bosniacs, Croats, etc...).

Illyrians and Thracians (and Dacian, of course) probably were significantly I2a carriers and today Balkan population largely comes from them, and much less from Goths, Celts, Slavs etc. although they are certainly contributed.

For me the most interesting question is which was the original I2a and earlier I language. First Balkan language, the language of hunters-gatherers was language of I carriers. Where we can search the language? My opinion is maybe in Sardinia (Nuragic?), or even Iberia. I'd like to hear any idea, it's probably not easy and carries speculation but to try.
What are you blabbering about, idiot? Hard to make sense of your inconsistent post. Armenian is Indo-European language that migrated along with Phrygian to its current position from the Balkans. As for R1b, have you ever heard of the "Balkan cluster"? You should look into it because it is also linked with this migration:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDgMTVnUnIU

Latin influence is separated in stages, dimwit, that entered Albanian even as early as before christ. There are no Afro-Asiatic words on Albanians language that any serious linguist has mentioned, except some words that entered Albanian during Ottoman Empire, which actually are more numerous in Serbian than any other language in the Balkans. Albanians have mostly y-dna of the older Balkan population, which makes sense when one considers our history, while the I2a is very young subclade and shouldn't be associated with the older population of the peninsula.

Garrick
03-04-15, 12:58
Most of these "Slavic" chieftains names sounds like Baltic names,lol.
I know for sure that at least one dinasty of the so called "Bulgarian empire" were Vlachs - Asen dinasty .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asen_dynasty

Yes, these Slavic names sounds like Baltic, Dacian, Thracian. It is probably because these languages have common base.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Balto-Slavic_lng.png

clintCG
03-04-15, 19:12
P. Heather, "Empires and Barbarians", in chapter 5. "Huns on the Run" claims that in 488 AD ca. 100,000 Goths settled in Italy.This contradicts the claim that Goths didn't settle there.

There should be a genetic trace of that migration as 100 thousand people = ca. 2% of the population of Italy at that time.
It matches modern day concentration of I2 in Italy (3 percent) very good. In northern Italy it rises to 10 percent in Trento, which makes sense since Goths settled mostly in northern Italy, with just few garissons in south.
I know that Slavs sometimes penetrated into Apennines and raided, but they did not really settle there, and left almost no genetic traces.

Garrick
04-04-15, 01:45
What are you blabbering about, idiot?

I will not say that you are idiot.
You do not have to agree of course but should listen to other opinions, not just what you've designed.
And the science is advancing every day.

...
A lot of researchers, Pederson, Pisani, Kortlandt, Martrosyan, Butskrihidze etc. found closeness between Armenian and Albanian (unlike non-existent connecton between Illyrian and Albanian because one language is CENTUM and second is SATEM).

What is interesting, Armenian researchers recognized particular relationship between the pre-Albanian and the pre-Armenian. But Albanians deny it, they still trying to find a connection with the Illyrian as a futile effort because this relationship does not exist.

Someone can imagine swept period of time, movements from Caucasus and Anatolia, so many changes over the centuries, including modern language reforms. And yet he or she still can be able to catch some similar roots of words these two languages.

Old Armenian and Geg Albanian are better for comparisons. But here are examples some similar words in modern Armenian and Albanian:

իմ im (Arm.) im (Alb.)
դուռ durr (Arm.) derë (Alb.)
անուրջ anurj (Arm.) ëndër (Alb.) anerr (Geg Alb.)
մորուք moruk’ (Arm.) mjekër (Alb.)
միս mis (Arm.) mish (Alb.)
նորահարս norahars (Arm.) nuse (Alb.)
սխտոր skhtor (Arm.) hudhër (Alb.) (root: htr, hdhr)
ջերմ jerm (Arm.) zjarrmi (Alb.)
արջ arj (Arm.) ari (Alb.)
աղբյուր aghbyur (Arm.) burim (Alb.)
եվ jev (Arm.) dhe (Alb.)
ջուր jur (Arm.) ujëra (Alb.)
ատամ atam (Arm.) dhëmb (Alb.) (root: tm, dhm)
մեգ meg (Arm.) mjegull (Alb.)

Sorry, this is not Illyrian, this is Armenian, modern Armenian.

...
And we should get back to the topic about haplogroup I. I said, for me it is interesting theme where someone can search vanished I languages, if I have time I will open thread about that.

Skerdilaidas
04-04-15, 02:02
I will not say that you are idiot.
You do not have to agree of course but should listen to other opinions, not just what you've designed.
And the science is advancing every day.

...
A lot of researchers, Pederson, Pisani, Kortlandt, Martrosyan, Butskrihidze etc. found closeness between Armenian and Albanian (unlike non-existent connecton between Illyrian and Albanian because one language is CENTUM and second is SATEM).

What is interesting, Armenian researchers recognized particular relationship between the pre-Albanian and the pre-Armenian. But Albanians deny it, they still trying to find a connection with the Illyrian as a futile effort because this relationship does not exist.

Someone can imagine swept period of time, movements from Caucasus and Anatolia, so many changes over the centuries, including modern language reforms. And yet he or she still can be able to catch some similar roots of words these two languages.

Old Armenian and Geg Albanian are better for comparisons. But here are examples some similar words in modern Armenian and Albanian:

իմ im (Arm.) im (Alb.)
դուռ durr (Arm.) derë (Alb.)
անուրջ anurj (Arm.) ëndër (Alb.) anerr (Geg Alb.)
մորուք moruk’ (Arm.) mjekër (Alb.)
միս mis (Arm.) mish (Alb.)
նորահարս norahars (Arm.) nuse (Alb.)
սխտոր skhtor (Arm.) hudhër (Alb.) (root: htr, hdhr)
ջերմ jerm (Arm.) zjarrmi (Alb.)
արջ arj (Arm.) ari (Alb.)
աղբյուր aghbyur (Arm.) burim (Alb.)
եվ jev (Arm.) dhe (Alb.)
ջուր jur (Arm.) ujëra (Alb.)
ատամ atam (Arm.) dhëmb (Alb.) (root: tm, dhm)
մեգ meg (Arm.) mjegull (Alb.)

Sorry, this is not Illyrian, this is Armenian, modern Armenian.

...
And we should get back to the topic about haplogroup I. I said, for me it is interesting theme where someone can search vanished I languages, if I have time I will open thread about that.
There are no Illyrian texts that have sufficed thus far...Since you seem to know more then us, can you please show us these Illyrian text so we too can understand that Albanian is not derived from it? Also, did you watch the video I linked? Please do, here I will link it again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDgMTVnUnIU


Also, since you are playing "the linguist" do show the sources of the study that confirm the similarities of the Gheg words with old Armenian you have provided.

mihaitzateo
04-04-15, 13:14
Well if you search in history is said by a Greek historian that Dacians and Sarmatians had same language.
Now,there is also a Polish folk tradition that Polish nobility was coming from Sarmatians.
What we are seeing is that is plenty of R1b-L23 in Romania and Poland,from countries that have more Slavic-like genetics.
There is also R1b-L23 in Albanian,Armenia so is clear these people brought a Satem IE language.
So here is the theory:
I2-din North and South are something like Proto-Slavs,or so,who were here from lots of time.
R1b-L23 people came and conquered the area,including the agricultural practicing people from today Albania.
After,it was an expansion of Baltic speakers,that spreads R1b-Z280 and this is how current Slavic languages were born,from Baltic language.
It is more than clear that Baltic people conquered and imposed their language to Slavic people,since all Slavic people are bearing a little N1C1 and all have some percentage of R1a-Z280 also they are having I1. Deep clade analysis would be interested to be seen.
These Baltic speakers were strong people,they are still strongest in the world,as genetics and they were also great warriors.
I think this is how the so called "Slavic expansion" took place,which spread R1A-Z280 mostly.
It was enough for people South of Danube to have leaders from this Balto-Slavic speakers to get their language changed to more a Baltic version.
There are common words,lots of them,between Romanian and South Slavic,that are not found in Eastern or Western Slavic languages,neither in Albanian,neither in Italian.
Guess from where those words are?
If those words would have been of Sarmatian or Dacian origins,than it would should also have been in Albanian.
It those words would have been of Latin origins,than it should have been present in Romance or Latin.
So those are words from Proto-Slavs (or whatever those I2-dinaric people were) language,that was not kept,but only words from it are kept.
I called them proto-Slavs because Hutsuls are identical to Romanians as genetics,folk customs but speaks some kind of Ukrainian dialect.

Ike
04-04-15, 17:07
There are no Illyrian texts that have sufficed thus far...Since you seem to know more then us, can you please show us these Illyrian text so we too can understand that Albanian is not derived from it?
OK, this sounds stupid.



Considering similarities between Albanian and Armenian, for example:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/258519878_Intriguing_linguistic_similarities_Alban ian-Armenian

Skerdilaidas
04-04-15, 20:04
OK, this sounds stupid.



Considering similarities between Albanian and Armenian, for example:
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/258519878_Intriguing_linguistic_similarities_Alban ian-Armenian

I tell you what, the only thing stupid here is your ignorance. You South Slavs seem to have unpenetratable thick skulls, that need to be smacked few times before you can concentrate and pay attention on a subject and what is presented in front of you. Ms. Marika on her second page states "Though not an expert of Historical and Comparative Indo-European linguistics myself" and that is how far I read that link. You dismiss the video of a linguist that deals with Indo-European languages for an amateur. Get real!

That Armenian shares features with Greek, Albanian and other Indo-Europeans languages is understood. It is even placed on the Balkan branch of Indo-European languages, and along with Greek and Phrygian are placed on the Eastern branch, while Albanian is placed on the Western branch as the only survivor of the paleo Balkan languages. But when you try to show such example as evidence that Albanian language migrated from Caucasus, be mindful because Greek is closer to Armenian.

Tomenable
04-04-15, 20:28
Now,there is also a Polish folk tradition that Polish nobility was coming from Sarmatians.
What we are seeing is that is plenty of R1b-L23 in Romania and Poland,from countries that have more Slavic-like genetics.
There is also R1b-L23 in Albanian,Armenia so is clear these people brought a Satem IE language.

This tradition doesn't say anything specifically about nobility, but about Poles in general.

Polish nobility has had roughly the same genetic structure as Polish population as a whole. Over 50% of R1a.

Here you can find Y-DNA haplogroups of Polish nobility from the region of Mazovia:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/MasovianNob/default.aspx?section=yresults

I calculated this on 12.06.2014 (it is possible that they added some new samples since then, I have not checked):

R1a - 77 (52,74%)
R1b - 23 (15,75%)
I2a - 13 (8,91%)
I2b - 1 (0,69%)
I1a - 8 (5,48%)
J2b2a - 7 (4,79%)
C3b - 5 (3,42%)
E1b1b1a2 - 4 (2,74%)
G2a - 3 (2,05%)
R2 - 2 (1,37%)
N1c1a - 2 (1,37%)
Q - 1 (0,69%)

Here more detailed information on subclades (sample size 146 nobles):

R1a, 77 nobles:

R1a1a1b1a* (Z282+ M458- Z280- Z284-) ---------------- 1
R1a1a1b1a1* (M458+ L260- L1029-) ---------------- 5
R1a1a1b1a1a (M458+ L260+) ---------------- 19
R1a1a1b1a1b (M458+ Z2953+ L1029-) ---------------- 8
R1a1a1b1a1b1 (M458+ Z2953+ L1029+) ---------------- 12
R1a1a1b1a2* (Z280+ CTS1211- Z92-) ---------------- 2
R1a1a1b1a2a (Z280+ Z92+) ---------------- 7
R1a1a1b1a2b3* (Z280+ CTS3402+) ---------------- 16
R1a1a1b1a2b3a (Z280+ CTS3402+ L365+) ---------------- 1
R1a1a1b1a2b3b (Z280+ CTS1211+ L366+) ---------------- 5
R1a1a1b1a2b3c (Z280+ CTS1211+ L1280+) ---------------- 1

R1b, 23 nobles:

R1b1a2 (M269+) Unassigned (NEED SNP test) ---------------- 8
R1b1a2a1a1a (L11+ U106+) and subclades ---------------- 2
R1b1a2a1a1b3 (L11+ P312+ U152+) and subclades ---------------- 6
R1b1a2a1a1b4 (L11+ P312+ L21+) and subclades ---------------- 4
R1b1a2a2 (Z2103+ L11-) and subclades ---------------- 1
R1b1a2a2 (Z2103+ L11-) PREDICTED (SNP test needed) ---------------- 2

I2a, 13 nobles:

I2a2 (M423+ L621+) 'Northern' cluster ---------------- 6
I2a2 (M423+ L621+) 'Southern' cluster ---------------- 6
I2a2 (M423+ L621+) unknown cluster ---------------- 1

I2b, 1 noble:

I2b1 (M223+) ---------------- 1

I1a, 8 nobles:

I1a (DF29+) (other SNPs not tested) ---------------- 4
I1a1* (Z2336+) 'Polish' cluster ---------------- 3
I1a1b (Z2336+ L22+) 'Northern Cluster' ---------------- 1

J2b, 7 nobles:

J2b2a (M241+, L283+) ---------------- 7

C3, 5 nobles (Baczewscy family from Bacze Mokre and Sasinowscy family from Krajewo Stare and Rosochate):

C3b (M217+ L1373+ F1756+) ---------------- 5

E1b, 4 nobles:

E1b1b1a2 (V13+) ---------------- 4

G2a, 3 nobles:

G2a (P15+) ---------------- 3

R2, 2 nobles:

R2 (M479+) and subclades ---------------- 2

N1c, 2 nobles:

N1c1a (M178+) ---------------- 2

Q, 1 noble:

Q ---------------- 1

============================================

And here you have Y-DNA haplogroups of nobility from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania:

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/WXL_Nobility/default.aspx?section=yresults

The last time I checked it carefully was also on 12.06.2014.

Tomenable
04-04-15, 20:55
Baczewscy and Sasinowscy (C3b) could be descendants of Tatar or Mongol refugees who were promoted to noble status. However, for example Chazbijewicze - a family of Lipka Tatars promoted to nobility status in Poland-Lithuania - have haplogroup R1b1a1 (R-M73). Here you can listen to Selim, one of members of this family (R1b-M73 wasn't tested on him, but on another guy from this family):


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQqPf6Dm1NI

Lipka Tatars were political refugees who escaped to Poland-Lithuania during civil wars within the Golden Horde.

Poland-Lithuania and Teutonic Order provided assistance to one of opposing Tatar-Mongol factions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Vorskla_River

The first leader of Lipka Tatars who settled in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was Tokhtamysh:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokhtamysh

Sile
04-04-15, 21:03
I tell you what, the only thing stupid here is your ignorance. You South Slavs seem to have unpenetratable thick skulls, that need to be smacked few times before you can concentrate and pay attention on a subject and what is presented in front of you. Ms. Marika on her second page states "Though not an expert of Historical and Comparative Indo-European linguistics myself" and that is how far I read that link. You dismiss the video of a linguist that deals with Indo-European languages for an amateur. Get real!

That Armenian shares features with Greek, Albanian and other Indo-Europeans languages is understood. It is even placed on the Balkan branch of Indo-European languages, and along with Greek and Phrygian are placed on the Eastern branch, while Albanian is placed on the Western branch as the only survivor of the paleo Balkan languages. But when you try to show such example as evidence that Albanian language migrated from Caucasus, be mindful because Greek is closer to Armenian.

to link I2a " illyrian" or even the name Illyrian , with anything to do with anything Albanian is a major error ..............IF we are to link I2a with anything Illyrian, it would be with the Bosnians.

Tomenable
04-04-15, 21:10
to link " illyrian" or even the name Illyrian , with anything to do with anything Albanian is a major error

Why so ???

Albanians are not descendants of all Illyrians, but they can be descendants of one of Illyrian-speaking tribes.

Sile
04-04-15, 21:11
T
The oldest I1 (and the only one from Stone Ages) comes from that archaeological site of the LBKT culture:

http://s12.postimg.org/c79ohwcjx/R1a_R1b_Russia.png

Eupedia says:



So I1 haplogroup clearly originally migrated into Scandinavia, and not from Scandinavia - contrary to what Garrick suggested.

The markers as per the map shows to me the original "Illyrian" markers...........no E or J found

Sile
04-04-15, 21:13
Why so ???

Albanians are definitely not descendants of all Illyrians, but they can be descendants of one of Illyrian-speaking tribes.

which tribe,? the one the fled from the other illyrian tribes in the north and merged with Epirote and Macedonian tribes in northern Albania............yes they did become a dominate tribe but it was mostly a coastal tribe.

My take is Albanian where resettled in modern Albania by the Romans.......these Albanians fled from scythian and Samaritan pressure in the southern Carpathian mountains. basically sitting north of the dacians.
There is NO evidence in any Roman historian prior to 150AD of any Albanians in Albania...............the Romans took this area in 196BC from the Macedonians

Melancon
04-04-15, 22:54
which tribe,? the one the fled from the other illyrian tribes in the north and merged with Epirote and Macedonian tribes in northern Albania............yes they did become a dominate tribe but it was mostly a coastal tribe.

My take is Albanian where resettled in modern Albania by the Romans.......these Albanians fled from scythian and Samaritan pressure in the southern Carpathian mountains. basically sitting north of the dacians.
There is NO evidence in any Roman historian prior to 150AD of any Albanians in Albania...............the Romans took this area in 196BC from the MacedoniansI personally believe that they are a Thracian tribe of some sort. Genetics seem to point to this. Either that or they are related to the Thracians in some way.

MOESAN
04-04-15, 23:01
I find (for now) easier to imagine Slavic and Baltic languages emerged from a common satem language spoken in the western steppes by a population dominated numerically by Y-R1a bearers, imponing themselves upon a Y-N1 dominated population near the Baltic, and upon a post-Tripolje population, variated but rich of Y-I2a1a Din in N-W Ukraina (close to the North Carpathians), themselves heirs of older highlands old forms of Y-I2a1a stayed there a long time as HGs on the mergins of the Neolithic people -
I wait some deep clades of Y-I2a1a of Dalmatia to be sure of the way taken by the ancestors of these later ones in Yugoslavia: only "slavic" clades or more local and older ones?

Ike
05-04-15, 05:29
I tell you what, the only thing stupid here is your ignorance.

No, dude. What you had said is utterly stupid. As simple as that.


You South Slavs seem to have unpenetratable thick skulls, that need to be smacked few times before you can concentrate and pay attention on a subject and what is presented in front of you. Ms. Marika on her second page states "Though not an expert of Historical and Comparative Indo-European linguistics myself" and that is how far I read that link.
Multiple LOLs. You probably don't even know what that means.


You dismiss the video of a linguist that deals with Indo-European languages for an amateur. Get real!
I didn't even watch that video. You first sentence in that post is so low on intelligence, that it discouraged me to read that paragraph further.


That Armenian shares features with Greek, Albanian and other Indo-Europeans languages is understood.

So, now it's understood ?!?!?!??! What the hell was this then?


Also, since you are playing "the linguist" do show the sources of the study that confirm the similarities of the Gheg words with old Armenian you have provided.

Smells like троллинг.

Garrick
05-04-15, 11:51
I personally believe that they are a Thracian tribe of some sort. Genetics seem to point to this. Either that or they are related to the Thracians in some way.

One new meticulously scientific research suggests that Albanian is the closest to Indo-Iranian languages (for example Indo-Iranian languages are Baluchi, Persian, etc. and Kashmiri, Hindi, etc).

It is interesting that Armenian is something further in comparison to the Indo-Iranian in terms of connections with Albanian.

If it is true Albanian could formed somewhere in today Caucasus region, South Russia, Eastern Anatolia or maybe Northern Iran or further east but we will see next scientific studies.

According this (if it is true), it is probably that carriers of R1b-ht35, J2 and maybe R1a haplogroups are creators original Albanian language (E-V13 is probably much later entered in Albanian substrate).

Dacian, Thracian, Balto-Slavic and Latin are much later influences, and they are "corrupted" original Albanian.

mihaitzateo
05-04-15, 13:20
You know,if Slavic speaking people bearing I2-din South have migrated to ex-Yugo,how come I2-din South is found at high percentages in Serbians,Montenegrins,Bosnians,Croatians and is not found even in significant percentages to other people?
Also,why I2-din South is found in ex-Yugo people,but not in Bulgarians,neither in Greeks?
If it supposed that Bulgarians migrated in same time with ex-Yugos,how come this difference?
It is quite not probable that a massive migration of people took place,but the place from where they left do not have any I2-din South left,neither they left any I2-din South on the migration route they went.
Bulgarians are having I2-din North,same about the I2-din from Greece,so rather seems these I2-din North bearers moved from North of Danube to South of Danube.
So I think I2-din South rather formed in Balkan mountains.
As for I2-din North,which is present at Bulgarians and Greeks,how it got there,this would be a different discussion.

gyms
05-04-15, 14:42
mihaitzateo:So I think I2-din South rather formed in Balkan mountains.
As for I2-din North,which is present at Bulgarians and Greeks,how it got there,this would be a different discussion.

...din North and din South is not valid designation anymore.

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html

mihaitzateo
05-04-15, 19:27
mihaitzateo:So I think I2-din South rather formed in Balkan mountains.
As for I2-din North,which is present at Bulgarians and Greeks,how it got there,this would be a different discussion.

...din North and din South is not valid designation anymore.

http://www.isogg.org/tree/ISOGG_HapgrpI.html
Oh lol,really?
I2-din North and I2-din South are just known now under different names,but the genetic reality,is same.
Romanians,Ukrainians,Poles,Bulgarians,Greeks have a kind of I2-din,while Croats,Bosnians,Serbians,Montenegrins have a different kind of I2-din.
The maximum percentage of I2-din previously known as I2-din North is in Romania,maximum percentage of I2-din previously known as I2-din South have the maximum in Bosnia.
This genetic reality raises a lot of question marks about the known "Slavic migration".
While in the case of Bulgaria,it stands as true,Slavs came from North,settled in Bulgaria,it does not stands as true in the case of Serbians,Bosnians,Croats and Montenegrins.
Those Slavs who moved to ex-Yugo should have carried different paternal lines than what it was previously known as I2-din South.
I am curios what kind of I2-din is present in Austria and Hungary.
I suppose that in Hungary there is I2-din North,while in Austria,mostly I2-din South,because lots of ex-Yugos were encouraged to move to Austria,from Serbia,Croatia etc,to escape Ottoman rule(what is written in Italic I am not sure of it,remember that I have read somewhere about it,but could not find it anymore).

gyms
06-04-15, 13:02
Oh lol,really?
I2-din North and I2-din South are just known now under different names,but the genetic reality,is same.
Romanians,Ukrainians,Poles,Bulgarians,Greeks have a kind of I2-din,while Croats,Bosnians,Serbians,Montenegrins have a different kind of I2-din.
The maximum percentage of I2-din previously known as I2-din North is in Romania,maximum percentage of I2-din previously known as I2-din South have the maximum in Bosnia.
This genetic reality raises a lot of question marks about the known "Slavic migration".










While in the case of Bulgaria,it stands as true,Slavs came from North,settled in Bulgaria,it does not stands as true in the case of Serbians,Bosnians,Croats and Montenegrins.
Those Slavs who moved to ex-Yugo should have carried different paternal lines than what it was previously known as I2-din South.
I am curios what kind of I2-din is present in Austria and Hungary.
I suppose that in Hungary there is I2-din North,while in Austria,mostly I2-din South,because lots of ex-Yugos were encouraged to move to Austria,from Serbia,Croatia etc,to escape Ottoman rule(what is written in Italic I am not sure of it,remember that I have read somewhere about it,but could not find it anymore).
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/I2aHapGroup/default.aspx?section=yresults
https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Alpine_DNA_Project_AlpGen_Genealogy/default.aspx?section=yresults
http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml

https://www.familytreedna.com/public/Hungarian_Magyar_Y-DNA_Project?iframe=yresults
https://www.familytreedna.com/groups/romania/about/results

Skerdilaidas
25-04-15, 04:35
One new meticulously scientific research suggests that Albanian is the closest to Indo-Iranian languages (for example Indo-Iranian languages are Baluchi, Persian, etc. and Kashmiri, Hindi, etc).

It is interesting that Armenian is something further in comparison to the Indo-Iranian in terms of connections with Albanian.

If it is true Albanian could formed somewhere in today Caucasus region, South Russia, Eastern Anatolia or maybe Northern Iran or further east but we will see next scientific studies.

According this (if it is true), it is probably that carriers of R1b-ht35, J2 and maybe R1a haplogroups are creators original Albanian language (E-V13 is probably much later entered in Albanian substrate).

Dacian, Thracian, Balto-Slavic and Latin are much later influences, and they are "corrupted" original Albanian.
Lol, can you post this "new meticulously scientific research" so we can all have a look at them, and see what you are blabbering about?

Skerdilaidas
25-04-15, 04:41
to link I2a " illyrian" or even the name Illyrian , with anything to do with anything Albanian is a major error ..............IF we are to link I2a with anything Illyrian, it would be with the Bosnians.
Where have I suggested that I2a is Illyrian, or are you just bored and felt the need to quote me? "even the name Illyrian, with anything to do with Albanians is a major error" go tell that to countless serious linguists and historians, my amateur friend.

Garrick
01-05-15, 23:07
Lol, can you post this "new meticulously scientific research" so we can all have a look at them, and see what you are blabbering about?

You can read more. This is research of scientists from New Zealand, scientists used computational methods. I will open new thread when I have time.

Skerdilaidas
03-05-15, 19:39
You can read more. This is research of scientists from New Zealand, scientists used computational methods. I will open new thread when I have time.

Lol point us to this "study"

Garrick
03-05-15, 21:08
Lol point us to this "study"

Do not underestimate the serious scientists who publish in reputable scientific international journals. Science progresses and empty platitudes mean nothing. I told I will set new thread, it is not for this thread.

Sile
03-05-15, 21:19
Where have I suggested that I2a is Illyrian, or are you just bored and felt the need to quote me? "even the name Illyrian, with anything to do with Albanians is a major error" go tell that to countless serious linguists and historians, my amateur friend.

You silly person, the epicentre of Illyrians tribes are in Croatia and Bosnia and NOT in the south of Albania or the North of Austria

The illyrian revolt of 9BC against Rome was in the epicentre

mihaitzateo
04-05-15, 00:10
Lol,what I2-din has to do with Illyrians?
Already wrote here,I2-din North highest concentration (and I think highest diversity) is in North Moldavia,in Romania.
As for I2-din South highest concentration is in Bosnia.
I know that in Neamt county from Romania there is about 40% I2-din.
If it proves that in Neamt county is highest concentration of I2-din from Romania and already knowing that this I2-din is I2-din North and taking the name of the place,Neamt = German I think it becomes clear from where I2-din North came,from some Germanic people.
Already written is quite unlikely that this I2-din would have come with Slavs,because both I2-din branches have maximum in mountains.
And I do not think is linked with Goths either,since Goths were not mountain loving people,but to some mountain Germans.
People who likes mountains and are Germanic speakers are usually West Germanic speakers.

Kurgan
13-05-15, 20:53
I don't think the Slavs are responsible for bringing I2a-Din to the Balkans...



What if the Serbs and Croats picked up I2a-Din somewhere on their way, say around the Morava in SW Slovakia / Eastern Austria (which, as I have understood, seems to be another diversity hotspot)? Well, first of all, this would leave the question how I2a-Din made it almost to the Balkans without the Slavs, but required them to finally arrive there. I believe the grass isn't any less green on the southern bank of the Danube than on the northern shore, and the advance of the Huns would have provided for enough good reason to move on a bit further south, even for those that previously didn't think living in the Roman Empire might be attractive.. Secondly, the advancing Slavs must have picked up quite a lot of I2a-Din on their way to bring forward the frequencies observed today.
Most importantly, however, if I2a-Din was already present around the Morava (March - the Austro-Slovakian, not the one in today's Serbia), you don't need the Slavs to explain I2a-Din presence on the Balkans. I find it strange that on 23 pages so far nobody has yet been discussing the Heruli: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heruli






An interesting point! How did I miss this contribution?

Perhaps a coincidence, but my family (Slovak) for as long as my family tree goes, are from the border region along the River Morava (Gajary)... and they are all Z16971 positive (A815 negative).

Tomenable
22-05-15, 21:10
FrankN,

If you associate I2a-Din with the Heruli, show me why there is no I2a-Din in Scandinavia:

"(...) According to Procopius, many Heruli migrated back to Scandinavia and settled beside the North Germanic Geats (Gautoi). The places where they are assumed to have resettled have been identified with Värmland or the provinces of Blekinge and Värend, two districts where women had equal rights of inheritance with their brothers. Some noble Swedish families in the area claim to be descendants of the returning Heruli. Such identifications are not widely accepted. It has been suggested that it was Heruli who first colonized Iceland[3] or were assimilated among the people of Uppland initiating the drastic changes there in the 6th century.[4] (...)"

Large part of the Heruli migrated to Scandinavia - and why didn't they bring I2a-Din there?

gyms
27-05-15, 16:54
Lol,what I2-din has to do with Illyrians?
Already wrote here,I2-din North highest concentration (and I think highest diversity) is in North Moldavia,in Romania.
As for I2-din South highest concentration is in Bosnia.
I know that in Neamt county from Romania there is about 40% I2-din.
If it proves that in Neamt county is highest concentration of I2-din from Romania and already knowing that this I2-din is I2-din North and taking the name of the place,Neamt = German I think it becomes clear from where I2-din North came,from some Germanic people.
Already written is quite unlikely that this I2-din would have come with Slavs,because both I2-din branches have maximum in mountains.
And I do not think is linked with Goths either,since Goths were not mountain loving people,but to some mountain Germans.
People who likes mountains and are Germanic speakers are usually West Germanic speakers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piatra_Neam%C8%9B

The Neamț citadel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neam%C8%9B_citadel), whose documentary attestation dates back to February 2, 1395, was also erected during the same consolidation period of the Moldovian pricipate east of the Carpathians. The Princely Court of Piatra Neamț is mentioned for the first time in a document dated April 20, 1491, to have been founded between 1468 and 1475, under Stephen the Great (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_III_of_Moldavia), the Princely Cathedral being built in 1497-1498, and the 20 m (65.62 ft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_(unit))) tall Bell Tower in 1499.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldova
Due to its strategic location on a route between Asia and Europe, the territory of modern Moldova was invaded many times in late antiquity and early Middle Ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Middle_Ages), including by Goths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goths), Huns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns), Avars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pannonian_Avars), Bulgarians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarians), Magyars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magyars), Pechenegs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pechenegs), Cumans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumans), Mongols (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe) and Tatars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_and_Tatar_states_in_Europe).The Principality of Moldavia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldavia), established in 1359, was bounded by the Carpathian Mountains (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carpathian_Mountains) in the west, Dniester (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dniester) river in the east, and Danube River and Black Sea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea) to the south. Its territory comprised the present-day territory of the Republic of Moldova, the eastern eight of the 41 counties of Romania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counties_of_Romania), and the Chernivtsi Oblast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernivtsi_Oblast) and Budjak (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budjak) region of Ukraine. Like the present-day republic and Romania's north-eastern region, it was known to the locals as Moldova. Moldavia was invaded repeatedly by Crimean Tatars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatars) and, since the 15th century, by the Turks. In 1538, the principality became a tributary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribute) to the Ottoman Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Empire), but it retained internal and partial external autonomy.[

Garrick
27-05-15, 19:01
Ancestors of Bosniaks, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Serbs and Croats are coming from White Croatia as Croats who later divided on these so-called nations....


...

Why this respectable forum tolerate this chauvinistic idiot?

Doku
Someone can thinks that more times repeated construction (untruth) can become true. But no.

Nations are not biological entities, nations are social constructions.

This applies of course and for the Balkans, as for world generally.

State boundaries have changed over times.

In this map is Serbia 1282-1321 (orange is Bosnia, green is Hungary, yellow is Bulgaria, and in the lower part of map in lilac colour is Byzantine).

http://www.njegos.org/markus/18.jpg

What this map tell us?

Where are Serbia and Bosnia in this map there is today the largest concentration of I2a1b2a1a3A356/Z16983.

Of course borders have changed

In that time Serbs were Orthodox and Roman Catholic, and Bosnians had religious pluralism, Bosnian church has dominated that considered as heretical by both the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox hierarchies.

Serbia had significantly strengthened and expanded its territory, but later, after the Battle of Kosovo in 1389 we all know what happened with the arrival of the Turks, where the Serbian medieval state destroyed.

It took many centuries to change things.

In the meantime there has been a significant change in religious population these areas.

Orthodox church in these areas (and in these areas carriers of haplogroup I2a1b2a1a3A356/Z16983 are dominated) was losing believers, orthodox Serbs converted to other religions.

In XIX century a lot of these areas came under rule of Austria Hungary.

This century is century of creating and integrating modern nations.

In these areas dominant factor for creating nations was religious.

Believers of Eastern Orthodox were Serbs, believers of Islam were Bosniacs. It is interesting there were Serbian and Bosnian Roman Catholic but over time they became Croats with creating a modern Croat nation.

So many carriers of haplogroup I2a1b2a1a3 A356/16983, Serbs and Bosnias, became Croats, not by origin, but by faith.

And it is normal, nation is not biological but social construction.
...

For integrating in modern nation Croats had big problem. One part of Croats had kajkavian language or dialect. This language is close to Slovenian.

From Wikipedia:
The Kajkavian dialect / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English)k (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)aɪ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)k (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)aː (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)v (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ə (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English) (Kajkavian noun: kajkavščina; Shtokavian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect) adjective: kajkavski [kǎjkaʋskiː] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Serbo-Croatian),[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-2) noun: kajkavica or kajkavština [kajkǎːʋʃtina] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Serbo-Croatian))[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-3) is a dialect of the Serbo-Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian) language spoken by Croats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croats) in Central Croatia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Croatia),[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Mattheier1991-4) Gorski Kotar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorski_Kotar)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-EliassonJahr1997-5) and northern Istria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istria).[note 1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-6)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-7)[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Kalsbeek1998-8) It has low mutual intelligibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_intelligibility) with the Shtokavian dialect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect) upon which Croatia's standard language is based.[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Alexander2006-9)[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Slavicintell-10) Some notable linguists consider Kajkavian to be a language of its own.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-11) As of 2015, Literary Kajkavian has a separate language ISO 639-3 code – kjv. Active attempts are being made by some organizations to widen its recognition and status, which has thus far included introduction of school subjects in Kajkavian in some parts of Croatia as well as the creation of the aforementioned ISO code.[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-12)

The term Kajkavian stems from the interrogative pronoun kaj (what). The other main dialects of Serbo-Croatian also derive their name from their reflex of the interrogative pronoun.[12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Comrie2009-13)[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-14) However, the pronouns are only general pointers and do not serve as actual identifiers of the respective dialects. Certain Kajkavian dialects use the interrogative pronoun ča, the one that is usually used in the Chakavian dialect. The pronouns these dialects are named after are merely the most common one in that dialect.

Outside of Croatia, the dialect is also spoken in Austrian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austria) Burgenland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgenland) and a number of enclaves in Hungary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungary) (along the Austrian and Croatian border), and Romania (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romania).[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-GilbersNerbonne2000-15) Although speakers of Kajkavian are Croats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croats), and Kajkavian is as such also considered a dialect of Serbo-Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian), its closest relative is the Slovene language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovene_language), followed by Chakavian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect) and then Shtokavian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect). Kajkavian is part of a dialect continuum with both Slovene and Chakavian.[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect#cite_note-Greenberg2008-16)

Another part of Croatian spoked Chakavian language or dialect.

From Wikipedia:
Chakavian or Čakavian / (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English)tʃ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)aː (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)k (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)aː (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)v (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ə (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English) (Serbo-Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian_language): čakavski [tʃǎːkaʋskiː] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Serbo-Croatian),[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect#cite_note-2) proper name: čakavica or čakavština [tʃakǎːʋʃtina] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Serbo-Croatian),[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect#cite_note-3) own name: čokovski, čakavski, čekavski) is a dialect of the Serbo-Croatian language (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian_language) spoken by a minority of Croats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croats). It has low mutual intelligibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_intelligibility) with the Shtokavian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect) dialect.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect#cite_note-Slavicintell-4) There is much internal diversity, to the point where intelligibility between the northern and southern varieties of Chakavian is low.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect#cite_note-Slavicintell-4) All three main Serbo-Croatian dialects are named after their word for "what?", which in Čakavian is ča or ca. Chakavian is spoken mainly in the northeastern Adriatic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriatic): in Istria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istria), Kvarner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvarner) Gulf, in most Adriatic islands, and in the interior valley of Gacka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gacka), more sporadically in the Dalmatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalmatia) littoral (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littoral) and central Croatia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatia).
Chakavian was the basis for the first literary standard of the Croats. Today, it is spoken almost entirely within Croatia's borders, apart from the Burgenland Croats (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burgenland_Croatian_dialect) in Austria and Hungary and a few villages in Slovenia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovenia).
...

But Croats have adopted the Shtokavian dialect, spoken in today's Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montengro and in parts of todays Croatia.

Shtokavian or Štokavian (/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English)ʃ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)t (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ɒ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ˈ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)k (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)aː (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)v (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)i (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)ə (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)n (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English#Key)/ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_English); Serbo-Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian_language): štokavski / штокавски, pronounced [ʃtǒːkaʋskiː] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA_for_Serbo-Croatian))[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect#cite_note-2) is the prestige dialect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prestige_dialect) of the pluricentric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluricentric_language#Serbo-Croatian) Serbo-Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbo-Croatian) language, and the basis of its Bosnian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_language), Croatian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croatian_language), Serbian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_language), and Montenegrin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montenegrin_language) standards.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect#cite_note-3) It is a part of the South Slavic dialect continuum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialect_continuum#South_Slavic_continuum).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect#cite_note-4)[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shtokavian_dialect#cite_note-5) Its name comes from the form for the interrogatory pronoun for "what" in Western Shtokavian, što (it is šta in Eastern Shtokavian). This is in contrast to the Kajkavian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kajkavian_dialect) and Chakavian dialects (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakavian_dialect) (kaj and ča also meaning "what").

...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Croatian_dialects.PNG

In the picture is territorial display these languages/dialects in today's Croatia.

...
Knowledge of haplogroups reveals interesting picture.

Kajkavian language/dialect is quite coincide with haplogroup R1a ecpacially M458:

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1a.gif

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-R1a-M458.png
...

On the other hand shtokavian language/dialect is quite coincide with haplogroup I2a Dyn S, I2a1b2a1a3A356/Z16983.

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

And the conclusion can be drawn, those who speak a dialect of the Shtokavian language/dialect (Serbs, Bosnians, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, and some parts of Croatia) are the real I2a1b2a1a3A356/Z16983 carriers.
...

If I2a Dyn S Gothic? I don't believe, and I wrote about it (but who knows).

Here I will say about big irony of nationalists.

Some Serbian nationalists thought that Serbs are mostly R1a, but no. Serbs are mostly Old European and Balcanic.

Some Croat nationalists thought that Croats are German, but no. Kajkavian Croats are mostly R1a (mostly M458 closest to Chzecs).



Here the same data (plus "other" subclades):

A very interesting correlation can be seen (with only a few exceptions):

[WeS] - West Slavs
[EaS] - East Slavs
[SoS] - South Slavs

And this correlation (there are a few exceptions, as you can see below) is as follows:

West Slavs = more of M458
East Slavs = more of Z282
South Slavs = more of M558

Group (Z282 / M458 / M558 / other - as % of total R1a):

[WeS] Czechs----------------------------(10,1 / 79,8 / 10,1 / 0,0)
[WeS] Czechs Utah----------------------(0,0 / 70,0 / 19,9 / 10,1)
[SoS] Croatia mainland------------------(16,0 / 68,0 / 16,0 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Cherkassy-------------(22,4 / 53,1 / 24,5 / 0,0)
[WeS] Poland----------------------------(4,0 / 58,0 / 38,0 / 0,0)
[WeS] Slovakia--------------------------(4,1 / 46,2 / 48,0 / 1,7)
[SoS] Bulgaria---------------------------(10,8 / 42,0 / 40,4 / 6,8)
[WeS] Poles Wroclaw-------------------(17,6 / 43,2 / 39,2 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Ivano-Frank.----------(8,1 / 40,0 / 51,9 / 0,0)
[EaS] Belarusians Brest-Lit.-------------(15,8 / 38,6 / 45,6 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Kostroma---------------(18,9 / 37,4 / 43,7 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Donetsk---------------(30,4 / 30,4 / 37,0 / 2,2)
[EaS] Russians Pskov-------------------(37,1 / 25,8 / 35,5 / 1,6)
[EaS] Belarusians------------------------(38,4 / 23,2 / 38,4 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Belgorod--------------(49,9 / 11,6 / 38,5 / 0,0)
[EaS] Ukrainians Khmilnyk--------------(39,4 / 15,7 / 44,9 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Belgorod----------------(25,9 / 18,8 / 55,3 / 0,0)
[EaS] Russians Oryol--------------------(25,0 / 23,6 / 51,4 / 0,0)
[SoS] Serbia------------------------------(17,9 / 23,2 / 47,0 / 11,9)
[SoS] Macedonia-------------------------(18,0 / 27,3 / 54,7 / 0,0)
[SoS] Bosnia-----------------------------(19,8 / 19,8 / 60,4 / 0,0)
[SoS] Slovenia---------------------------(0,0 / 10,7 / 83,9 / 5,4)
[SoS] Herzegovina-----------------------(6,2 / 6,2 / 87,6 / 0,0)

BTW - resemblance between Czechs and mainland Croats is striking. As if they were one group that split in two.


According R1a people Serbia, Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina are closest (again people who speak shtokavian).

What if I2a Dyn S is Ghotic?

It means that shtokavian people Serbs and Bosniacs are descedents of Goths, it is logic.

mihaitzateo
27-05-15, 19:24
Well,I have remembered that after Roman Empire conquered Dacia it brought colonists from Austria and Gaul,in conquered land.
So if there is also I2-din found in Austria,maybe those colonists brought were carrying I2-din?
The land of Dacia was also including today Serbia and Montenegro.

gyms
28-05-15, 08:46
"I2a2a Dinaric is just too young to not have been the result of a sudden expansion not much more than 2000 years ago".

The sudden expansion may have been the result of the Mongol invasion.They changed the ethnic makeup of Eastern Europe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

Tomenable
28-05-15, 10:28
the Mongol invasion.They changed the ethnic makeup of Eastern Europe.

They did not:

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/East-Asian-admixture.gif

On the other hand, Slavic migrations did:

From "The Geography of Recent Genetic Ancestry across Europe":

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

"(...) There is also substantial regional variation in the number of shared genetic ancestors. For example, there are especially high numbers of common ancestors shared between many eastern populations that date roughly to the migration period (which includes the Slavic expansion into that region). (...)

(...) We quantify this ubiquitous recent common ancestry, showing for instance that even pairs of individuals from opposite ends of Europe share hundreds of genetic common ancestors over this time period. Despite this degree of commonality, there are also striking regional differences. Southeastern Europeans, for example, share large numbers of common ancestors that date roughly to the era of the Slavic expansion around 1,500 years ago. (...)"

The easiest and best explanation is that I2a-Din expanded with Slavic migrations.

Slavs originally lived in Ukrainian-Belarusian borderland, let's check the distribution of I2a-Din:

http://www.eupedia.com/europe/maps_Y-DNA_haplogroups.shtml

http://cdn.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

The distribution of I2a-Din fits to the patterns of Early Medieval Slavic expansion and migrations:

http://s17.postimg.org/q6cn36pdb/Slavic_expansion.png

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=120&v=vboRLQoQTj4


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vboRLQoQTj4

===================================

The distribution of Slavs after the end of their 1st expansion (the 2nd expansion was later into Siberia and the steppes):

http://s22.postimg.org/mtfqsgzj5/Slavic_lands_850.png4

http://s22.postimg.org/geo7gd30h/Slavic_expansion_2.png

This map below shows areas with Finno-Ugric (red colour) and Baltic settlement in the mid-to-late 800s. Some of these areas were regions with mixed Slavic-Baltic, Slavic-Finnic, etc. settlement, rather than fully Baltic and fully Finnic regions (compare with the map above, showing the extent of Slavic settlement in ca. year 850 - area with big red dots is "controversial", either still purely Finnic / Baltic in the mid-800s, or already mixed with Slavic settlement):

http://s17.postimg.org/mcrd7o52n/900.jpg

Tomenable
28-05-15, 10:49
Settlement areas of Finno-Ugrians and Balts were gradually shrinking under the pressure of expanding Slavs:

http://s8.postimg.org/omaiwrmfn/Expansion.png

The reduction of the size of Baltic territory by expanding Slavs until years ca. 1000 - 1100:

http://s14.postimg.org/5w58zt8kx/Baltic_tribes.png

Nowadays only remnants of Finno-Ugrian and Baltic populations survive.

The proportions of main ethno-linguistic groups in Europe:

http://s30.postimg.org/9tmeqp7tt/Countries_Europe.png

gyms
28-05-15, 11:33
http://www.africaresource.com/rasta/sesostris-the-great-the-egyptian-hercules/barbarian-invasion-of-europe/

Migrations would continue well beyond AD 1000, successive waves of Slavs, Avars, Bulgars, Hungarians, the Turkic expansion and finally the Mongol invasions, radically changing the ethnic makeup of Eastern Europe.



After the changes of the immediate post-Soviet years, twenty-one nationality-based republics existed in the Russian Federation and were recognized in the constitution of 1993 (see table 10, Appendix). They are Adygea, Bashkortostan, Buryatia, Chechnya, Chuvashia, Dagestan, Gorno-Altay, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Kalmykia, Karachayevo-Cherkessia, Karelia, Khakassia, Komi, Mari El, Mordovia, North Ossetia, Sakha (Yakutia), Tatarstan, Tyva (Tuva), and Udmurtia.
http://countrystudies.us/russia/34.htm

The terms “ethnicity” and “nationality,” like most terms used in present-day social analysis, are inventions of modern times. In studying the Eastern Slavs, nineteenth-century linguists and ethnologists identified three major ethnic groups or, in their terminology, nationalities: Great Russian, Little Russian (Ukrainian), and Belarusian. But they also admitted major linguistic and cultural differences within those nationalities, and often the lack of clearly defined borders between them. The conclusion that emerges from an examination of the linguistic and ethnographic material is quite simple. The ethnic classifications themselves were the result of outside interference – in other words, they were constructed – while the borders of those ethnicities were created by stressing the differences between nationalities and downplaying the fault lines within them.
http://www.cambridge.org/asia/catalogue/catalogue.asp?isbn=9780521155113&ss=exc

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Mongol invasion in the 13th century set in motion a series of events which are still
evident in'the population of Ukraine today.
https://www.census.gov/population/international/files/sp/SP90.pdf

Tomenable
28-05-15, 11:49
Avars were small in numbers and they colonized only the Pannonian steppe, the area which is now Hungary.

Bulgars were also small in numbers (according to Angelov 1971, Bulgars under Asparukh numbered 20,000 - 25,000 people).

East Asian admixture is very insignificant in Europe - do you claim that the Mongols were not East Asian ???


Great Russian, Little Russian (Ukrainian), and Belarusian. But they also admitted major linguistic and cultural differences within those nationalities, and often the lack of clearly defined borders between them. The conclusion that emerges from an examination of the linguistic and ethnographic material is quite simple. The ethnic classifications themselves were the result of outside interference – in other words, they were constructed – while the borders of those ethnicities were created by stressing the differences between nationalities and downplaying the fault lines within them.

Ukrainians and Belarusians differentiated from Russians when Poland-Lithuania ruled western part of East Slavic lands.

Belarusians are East Slavs who lived in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania while Ukrainian are East Slavs who lived in Kingdom of Poland:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiPY5x2P3Xs


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiPY5x2P3Xs

Check also:

http://src-h.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/coe21/publish/no7_ses/chapter02.pdf

http://s10.postimg.org/dzpxifj1l/image.jpg

http://s23.postimg.org/bugmgctln/image.jpg

http://s21.postimg.org/cy77z3buv/image.jpg

Here is the summary of points made above by Ukrainian historian Yaroslav Hrytsak:

1) Early modern Ukrainian language (so called prosta mova) was closer to Polish than Russian in its vocabulary.

2) Ukraine was little affected by Russian cultural influences. Polish culture dominated until 1850s and extended as far as Kharkiv University.

3) Poland introduced Western European innovations to Ukraine (including German urban law, that had been previously adopted by Poland).

4) Both Ukrainian and Israeli national anthems begin with words "Ukraine / Israel has not yet died" - paraphrases of Polish anthem.

5) Ukrainian historians preferred Polish historical treatises to Russian sources, even when describing history of Kievan Rus.

6) Polish rule was a long-term integration factor for Belarussian and Ukrainian ethnic territories, under Polish rule those people became culturally distinct from Russians.

7) Cossack ethos was based on a Polish concept of homeland. Cossack desires of liberty and autonomy were based on ideas of Polish nobility.

8) The extent of historical Polish eastward political expansion, corresponds to / coincides with the intensity of Ukrainian identity (as distinct from Russian identity) and the spread of Ukrainian language among population.

9) Strongest and most visible until nowadays historical impact of Poland remains especially in Western Ukraine.

Tomenable
28-05-15, 11:54
BTW:


Migrations would continue well beyond AD 1000

Migrations never stop. There have always been migrations, since prehistory until 2015 AD.

You live in Sweden so you should know that there is currently a massive immigration into Sweden.

Tomenable
28-05-15, 12:15
The Mongol invasion in the 13th century set in motion a series of events which are still
evident in'the population of Ukraine today.

The Mongol invasion depopulated Central Ukraine, which was later re-colonized by two migration wives.

One from the north-west (from Western Ukraine and Poland) and one from the north-east (from Russian lands).

That's why Ukraine today is such a divided country - eastern regions are pro-Russian, western regions are anti-Russian.

Tomenable
28-05-15, 12:18
After the changes of the immediate post-Soviet years, twenty-one nationality-based republics existed in the Russian Federation and were recognized in the constitution of 1993 (see table 10, Appendix). They are Adygea, Bashkortostan, Buryatia, Chechnya, Chuvashia, Dagestan, Gorno-Altay, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Kalmykia, Karachayevo-Cherkessia, Karelia, Khakassia, Komi, Mari El, Mordovia, North Ossetia, Sakha (Yakutia), Tatarstan, Tyva (Tuva), and Udmurtia.

And what does it have to do with the Mongols?

Komis, Karelians, Maris, Mordovians, Udmurts are indigenous Finno-Ugric populations, who lived there before Slavic expansions.

Several other of the republics you listed, are inhabited by indigenous populations of the Caucasus.

And most of the rest are inhabited by Turkic peoples, rather than Mongolic.

They have nothing to do with Mongol invasion.

gyms
28-05-15, 12:18
Avars were small in numbers and they colonized only the Pannonian steppe, the area which is now Hungary.

Bulgars were also small in numbers (according to Angelov 1971, Bulgars under Asparukh numbered 20,000 - 25,000 people).

East Asian admixture is very insignificant in Europe - do you claim that the Mongols were not East Asian ???


OK,I understand your agenda.Avars,Bulgars..."were small in numbers",only Slavs were great .

"do you claim that the Mongols..." No.

http://www.protobulgarians.com/English%20translations/History%20of%20the%20Proto-Bulgarians.pdf

gyms
28-05-15, 12:26
And what does it have to do with the Mongols?

Komis, Karelians, Maris, Mordovians, Udmurts are indigenous Finno-Ugric populations, who lived there before Slavic expansions.

Several other of the republics you listed, are inhabited by indigenous populations of the Caucasus.

And most of the rest are inhabited by Turkic peoples, rather than Mongolic.

They have nothing to do with Mongol invasion.

You don't understand anything, man.

Tomenable
28-05-15, 12:28
OK,I understand your agenda.Avars,Bulgars..."were small in numbers",only Slavs were great

Nobody speaks Avar language in Europe today. Nobody speaks Proto-Bulgar language in Europe today.

Avars and Proto-Bulgars were nomadic herders - such people are by definition less numerous than farmers. Also ask any archaeologists - they will tell you that evidence of Avar habitation is only in the Pannonian steppe, and evidence of Proto-Bulgar habitation is only around the lower course of the Danube River at the Black Sea coast. Also - read "The Geography of Recent Genetic Ancestry across Europe":

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

"(...) There is also substantial regional variation in the number of shared genetic ancestors. For example, there are especially high numbers of common ancestors shared between many eastern populations that date roughly to the migration period (which includes the Slavic expansion into that region). (...)

(...) We quantify this ubiquitous recent common ancestry, showing for instance that even pairs of individuals from opposite ends of Europe share hundreds of genetic common ancestors over this time period. Despite this degree of commonality, there are also striking regional differences. Southeastern Europeans, for example, share large numbers of common ancestors that date roughly to the era of the Slavic expansion around 1,500 years ago. (...)"

Tomenable
28-05-15, 12:29
What is your ethnicity Gyms ??? Are you native Swedish or some immigrant ???

Tomenable
28-05-15, 12:33
The Bulgars were - proportionally - about as numerous in Bulgaria, as British people were in British-ruled India.

So are you claiming that modern people of India are genetic descendants of British conquerors and colonizers ???

There is not even any detectable amount of R1b in India - and surely the British had some sex with the locals!

gyms
28-05-15, 13:32
What is your ethnicity Gyms ??? Are you native Swedish or some immigrant ???

I am Polish but it's not your business.

mihaitzateo
29-05-15, 00:03
Lol,East Asian admixture has a lot of sources in Europe,not only Mongols.
Besides,in Bulgaria came Slavic speakers,the name is taken from some Turkic tribe,from what I remember.
As for the "depopulation" of Ukraine,are you very sure?
I can show you Romanians from Southern Romania,especially women looking identical to Ukrainian women.
So think again.
I think rather a part of Ukrainians emigrated to current day Romania and assimilated as Romanians.
Another part retired in the woods and repopulated Ukraine,when Mongols/Tatars left.
Also,what map you have with East Asian admixture is not accurate,in Ukraine,Romania,South Russia that admixture is lower than 2%.
In Northern Russia is higher as it is in Finland,but I doubt is from Tatars and Mongols,I think is from mixing with Finnic and Ugric people.
Finnic and Ugric people took East Asian admixture by living and mixing with Central Asian and Siberians who were already bearing East Asian admixture.

mihaitzateo
30-05-15, 11:44
A thing,Tormenable,why Slavs are having 2 main paternal lines,I2-din and R1A?
From a genetic point of view,Eastern Slavs and Poles are more closed to Lithuanians and Latvians (this is how it seems to me;Belarussians and Russians are having significant N1C,Ukrainians are having less N1C,I think is like 4%-5%).
So I think that if genetic testing of maternal lines of Slavic and Balto-Slavic speakers would be made,maybe this would help to clarify the things a little.

Милан М.
31-05-15, 20:44
Paleolithic continuity.

gyms
01-06-15, 10:38
Paleolithic continuity.

It's absurd.I2a-"Din" is 2000-2300 years old.

mihaitzateo
02-06-15, 18:47
It's absurd.I2a-"Din" is 2000-2300 years old.
Well are there any Slavic movements 2k years ago?
You do not find strange that highest concentrations of I2-din are in the mountainous areas?
I find this ^very weird.

Arame
25-07-15, 14:52
Is there any map where only I2a-Din is pictured? Without other I2a clades.
It would be very helpful for understanding it's probable relations.

Paleoguy
01-08-15, 19:26
I2a Dinaric came through Slavs without a doubt, the genetic evidence is overwhelming. The reasons are similar to the case made against R1b being native in western Europe.

The common mistake people make when trying to envision such scenario is that they visiualize the ancient Slavs as giant soup pot composed mostly of R1a, I2a and N haplogroups, similar to modern northern Slavs. And it hard to imagine one getting a bowl of soup from that pot and getting mostly I2a haplogroups, it doesn't make sense. But that was not the case in ancient days. In ancient pre-Christian days, tribes were more segregated by haplogroup (kinsmen).



The best theory I've come accross is that I2a Dinaric was originally part of an eastern Jastorf culture branch called the Gubin group. These people branched out and migrated eastward sometime after 300 BC when the Scythian power collapsed and much land in western Ukraine became safe to settle. These I2a tribe entered a territory that was dominated by R1a tribes(whether Balto-Slavic or Iranian).The ancient Greeks record these new people as the Bastartnae, which many ancient authors were confused about whether they were Germanic or Scythian, with the conclusion that they were a mixed bastardized Germanics. Later the new bosses of the steppe (Samaritan tribes) disturb the settlements of I2a folks who are forced to retreat northwards bringing them into more contact and cooperation witht the local R1a tribes. Later the Germanic tribes invade the area and the I2a and their R1a neighbors cooperate and ally themselves against new power. It was by living with, cooperating, forming alliances with R1a tribes for 7 centuries that merged these people into one forming the Slavs, eventully I2a acquired the speech of their R1a neigbors. The Huns with the help of the early Slavs broke down the power of the Germanic tribes, and the rest in known history.


But I2a folks did not settle everywhere in the Slavic world. In some regions their presence was strong, and in some regions it was not present at all. In Poland the R1a substratum that was at one period dominated by eastern Germanic tribes seems to have had no relationship with the I2a tribes to east of them, yet they are Slavic too. The Balkan Slavs decent from tribes that had strong I2a mixture. The Serbs in particular seem to decent from a rare I2a tribe that originally did not even have any R1a clansman among them. Modern Serbs have in their body now haplogroups that were pre-Slavic in the Balkans. All these changes were brought about by civilization and Christianity that broke down the old Indo-European system of kinship. It is illogical to try and explain against I2a migration from Slavs based on modern northern Slavs haplogroup frequencies.

LeBrok
05-08-15, 02:51
I2a Dinaric came through Slavs without a doubt, the genetic evidence is overwhelming. The reasons are similar to the case made against R1b being native in western Europe.

The common mistake people make when trying to envision such scenario is that they visiualize the ancient Slavs as giant soup pot composed mostly of R1a, I2a and N haplogroups, similar to modern northern Slavs. And it hard to imagine one getting a bowl of soup from that pot and getting mostly I2a haplogroups, it doesn't make sense. But that was not the case in ancient days. In ancient pre-Christian days, tribes were more segregated by haplogroup (kinsmen).



The best theory I've come accross is that I2a Dinaric was originally part of an eastern Jastorf culture branch called the Gubin group. These people branched out and migrated eastward sometime after 300 BC when the Scythian power collapsed and much land in western Ukraine became safe to settle. These I2a tribe entered a territory that was dominated by R1a tribes(whether Balto-Slavic or Iranian).The ancient Greeks record these new people as the Bastartnae, which many ancient authors were confused about whether they were Germanic or Scythian, with the conclusion that they were a mixed bastardized Germanics. Later the new bosses of the steppe (Samaritan tribes) disturb the settlements of I2a folks who are forced to retreat northwards bringing them into more contact and cooperation witht the local R1a tribes. Later the Germanic tribes invade the area and the I2a and their R1a neighbors cooperate and ally themselves against new power. It was by living with, cooperating, forming alliances with R1a tribes for 7 centuries that merged these people into one forming the Slavs, eventully I2a acquired the speech of their R1a neigbors. The Huns with the help of the early Slavs broke down the power of the Germanic tribes, and the rest in known history.


But I2a folks did not settle everywhere in the Slavic world. In some regions their presence was strong, and in some regions it was not present at all. In Poland the R1a substratum that was at one period dominated by eastern Germanic tribes seems to have had no relationship with the I2a tribes to east of them, yet they are Slavic too. The Balkan Slavs decent from tribes that had strong I2a mixture. The Serbs in particular seem to decent from a rare I2a tribe that originally did not even have any R1a clansman among them. Modern Serbs have in their body now haplogroups that were pre-Slavic in the Balkans. All these changes were brought about by civilization and Christianity that broke down the old Indo-European system of kinship. It is illogical to try and explain against I2a migration from Slavs based on modern northern Slavs haplogroup frequencies.
Wow, you made quite a story building it on supposition of few known historical events and our still rudimentary knowledge of genetics. In few years however we should know much better how it went. Hopefully ancient genomes start flooding in finally, from current trickling down.

Tomenable
06-08-15, 03:15
Underhill in his 2009 paper claimed that M458 branch of R1a originated in Poland 10000 years ago and spread from there - map:

http://s10.postimg.org/ongvq5yl5/M458.png

Now we know that M458 is probably at least two times younger than this (YFull estimates: "formed 4600 ybp, TMRCA 4400 ybp"):

http://www.yfull.com/tree/R-M458/

Of course it could still originate in Poland - as Underhill proposed in 2009 - but +/- 4600 years ago, rather than 10000 years ago. Also with recent aDNA findings, it is clear that there was a lot of R1a in and around present-day Poland already in the Bronze Age. Note that in the Bronze Age people in those areas spoke Indo-European, but a Satem language (could be some Proto-Balto-Slavic or/and Iranic). R1a so abundant in the discussed area in the Bronze Age (as per ancient DNA evidence), was neither Celtic, nor Germanic.

If anything, those guys were more likely to be Celtic than Germanic. A Daco-Thracian link is sometimes also proposed.

We really need ancient Y-DNA from the Iron Age, to compare how things changed until then since the Bronze Age.

Rethel
07-08-15, 23:15
There is not even any detectable amount of R1b in India - and surely the British had some sex with the locals!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Indian

In India it is less than promil... :)

Rethel
07-08-15, 23:18
I am Polish but it's not your business.

I, you, Tomenable, LeBrok, who else?

Maybe we change forums language? :grin:

It will be easier... if so many Poles and other Slavs are here... :smile:

Paleoguy
08-08-15, 05:03
Wow, you made quite a story building it on supposition of few known historical events and our still rudimentary knowledge of genetics. In few years however we should know much better how it went. Hopefully ancient genomes start flooding in finally, from current trickling down.

It is not my theory so I do not wish to take credit for it. I came across some genetic forums under Slavic subsections where it was hatched. The theory made sense to me the same way Maciamo's proposed theory on R1b and R1a migrations made sense. The puzzle just fits. I suppose I should make maps to help folks visualize and simplify it (a good method utilized by Maciamo). The only question the theory leaves me with is why is I2a Dinaric the only I2 branch of its kind in the Jastorf culture, why are there no cousin branches(other than the far distant ones in the British Isles), but being the only branch would make sense why I2a Dinaric would be forced to leave the Jastorf zone in possible conflict with other Jastorfers who belonged to the main Germanic haplgroups and would treat the lonely branch as an outsider. It also explains why this branch of Jastorf was already mingleling with R1a folks (Przeworsk culture).


Here is something I saved when researching about the Jastorf culture Gubin branch.
 



M. Shchukin
Rome and the Barbarians in Central and Eastern Europe
1st Century B.C. - 1st Century A.D.
'Chapter IV
The Jastorf culture seen narrowly and broadly: "Jastorf culture" and "Jastorf civilisation".

At the same time as southern subalpine regions were witnessing the complex development of Celtic civilisation, a no less complex development of a new entity was taking place in the north, in the marshy and forested plains of Schleswig-Holstein, Hannover, Mecklenburg and Brandenburg. The inhabitants of this area, still living in the Bronze Age, had been cut off by events in the south from their sources of raw materials and were compelled to master the new material of iron, which was abundant in the marshy ores of the region.

Having lost contact with the southern cultures of Hallstatt and early La Tène which had already mastered iron, the northerners were to develop indigenous and unique types of iron products. At that time the Jutland area of central and northern Denmark were becoming depopulated due either to climatic change or to some other factors. In contrast, the plains of northern Germany, from the Weser to the Oder and the lower reaches of the Elbe, were densely settled. Thus, parallel to the Celtic emergence and even earlier (at Hallstatt D stage), the Jastorf culture takes shape, displaying features and a structure fundamentally different from the refined and fantastic civilisation of the Celts.101

Gustav Schwantes, who devoted his long life to studying this culture, saw its basic characteristics as "sobriety", "circumspection", "sparseness", "utilitarianism", all of which can be conveyed by the single German word 'Nüchternheit".102 However, this characterisation is somewhat exaggerated and is applicable only to early Jastorf, when this culture is compared to the rich culture of the Celts. If one compares the early Jastorf culture with its eastern neighbour, the so-called Pomeranian Culture in Poland, in terms of the form and beauty of artefacts the latter is not very different, its urns (the same bomb-like vessels with high necks) are sometimes decorated with the primitive representation of the human face.

The utilitarian Jastorfers only made objects which were designed for generally lower the vessels - with the overall shape consequently changing from pitcher-like to basin-like.104 There is a gradual increase in the number of polished ceramics, normally black but sometimes with a brown tint. There is also a gradual tendency towards decorating the vessels with stuck on knobs: this is particularly noticeable in the middle, Ripdorf stage of this culture. Another distinctive decorative technique emerges: this consists of alternating polished and deliberately roughened sections on the body and shoulders of the vessel. The vessels of this culture are also distinguished by small ear-handles.

Throughout its existence the Jastorf culture cremated its dead. The remains collected from a funeral pyre were placed in an urn. Initially the urns were often surrounded with stones or hidden beneath small stone pavings. Later stones were entirely left out of funerary constructions. Quite often, particularly at the intermediate stage, the urns were covered with bowls or, in their absence, one assumes with wooden lids.105 The ritual placement of weapons in graves occurs only at the later stages, and can be connected with certain events which will be discussed below.

The second half of the 3rd century BC witnessed the collapse of Celtic expansion and the Celts retreat from Italy and Thrace. This was the period of "central European consolidation", corresponding to the transition from early to middle La Tène (i.e. from LTB to LTC), when the Celts' northern neighbours probably took advantage of the former's military failures.106 The Celts and local celticised populations disappeared from southern and central Germany towards the close of La Tène B. These changes led to a transformation of the Jastorf culture, within whose sphere these areas lay.107 Jastorf and La Tene were coming increasingly into closer contact; Celtic metal products and ceramics became ever more popular; Celtic items began appearing even in northern Germany and local craftsmen began imitating these new stylish decorations and implements.108
Celtic and celtic-type fibulae became widespread and the Jastorf culture ceased being "Infibularis". In some areas early La Tène Celtic fibulae survived a long time, occasionally far out-living their prototypes. This caused German archaeologists considerable difficulties in chronological terms.109 As a result of internal change and Celtic influence, a middle Jastorf style emerged in the north of Central Europe: this marks the transition of Jastorf culture to its Ripdorf stage. Henceforth the Jastorf and La Tène styles function as two impulse waves, with a new wave cresting whilst the power of the first recedes.110

Who then were the carriers of this initially peculiar and "sobre", Jastorf-culture? R. Hachmann's views on the subject were as follows. 'Whilst for a long time the Celts were shaping history, the Jastorf culture remained outside the limelight of history. Therefore we only know about their ways and history through archaeological evidence. Positive evidence allows us to conclude that the Celts were the carriers of La Tene culture, but nothing comparable exists for the Jastorf culture. We can only speculate that if La Tene culture is rooted in the emergence of the Celts, then Jastorf culture must he similarly linked to the emergence of the Germans or some part of them.111

Later, when the Jastorf culture territory emerges into the light of history, Roman military leaders, merchants and historians report various German tribes in the territory between the Rhine and Vistula. But contemporary historical, archaeological and philological analysis helps us to discern within this Teutonic territory another population, neither German nor Celtic but intermediate between the two, a third group, whose language has not survived to our times.112 This group could have occupied an area extending southwards to the mid-German plateau on the right bank of the Rhine, northwards to the river Ruhr and in parts even to the river Lippe, eastwards to the river Leine. This people was strongly celticised, and was at the same level of development as the Celts in the oppida. They also constructed fortified semi-towns, used the pottery wheel, were metal workers (a manufacturing centre has been discovered in the Siegerland locale), manufactured iron weapons (a cache of which has been found), and minted coins. Their burials recall those of the Jastorfers, consisting of urns containing calcified bones cleared of funeral pyre debris, although the ceramics are quite distinctive. The Romans of Caesar's and subsequent times, during the expeditions of Drusus and Tiberius, called them Germanics. But this territory contains a concentration of toponyms which can not be interpreted in terms of either German or Celtic languages. An intermediate people indeed, neither German nor Celtic!

A similar situation exists on the southern periphery of the Jastorf culture area, along both sides of the Thüringerwald.113 Perhaps this same intermediate people account for the Bodenbach-Podmokly group which formed in the northern Czech region during La Tène B2. Here too we find a mixture of Celtic, Jastorf and local elements ones of Bilendorf or Bialov type and of the Silesian-Platenica group of the Lusatian culture which had existed in this area since the Bronze Age.114

It is quite possible that a good number of such groups X, Y and Z in fact account for many of the tribes comprising what the Romans called "Germania libera". These groups were to become Germans not so much because of their origins and language, but because their political and historical fate was linked up with that of different German tribes, who were also experiencing a continuing process of change and development.

A paradox surrounds the term "Germani". Amongst surviving sources it first appears in the "History" by Posidonius (135-51 BC), a 52-volume work covering the period 146-96 BC, which survives in fragments cited by other authors. Fragments from his 30th volume contain reference to the Germans as occupying the right bank of the Upper Rhine adjoining Celtic areas and remarks on their habit of drinking a barbaric mixture of milk and wine as accompaniment to roast meat. But Posidonius does not use the name "Germani" for the Cimbri and Teutons who were emerging from the area of Jastorf development and whom all later authors were to recognise as Germans.115

The area in which Posidonius places the Germani was most likely occupied by the intermediate people, one group of whom probably bore the name "Germani"; later the name was extended to the entire population of the Rhine-Danube basin. The historic Germans, the heirs of the Jastorf culture, were most likely not related to the "Germani" mentioned by Posidonius and, strictly speaking, were not Germans, never called themselves by that name and do not label themselves as such even today.

The complexity of the ethnic-political situation in ancient Germany is emphasised by the fact that the unity of the Jastorf culture was only relative. The Jastorf culture divided into comparatively small territorial groups which developed separately from each other.116
If the heartland encompassed eastern Hannover, Schleswig-Holstein and western Mecklenburg (i.e. Jastorf culture in the narrow sense), then surrounding it was a broad band of different cultural groups, whose similarity with the heartland and between themselves varied. Taken together, however, they comprised the Jastorf culture in a broad sense and constituted in effect Jastorf civilisation.117 Included in this is the Harpstedt-Nienburg group of the middle Weser, characterised by the very attenuated but equally crude Harpstedt pots and the superbly glazed Nienburg bowl-pots. The North Sea coastal monuments extending from Holland to the north of the Elbe comprise a special group. Excavations here have uncovered the so-called terpen or wurten, i.e. the many-layered settlements situated in sand dunes so as to avoid flooding during high tides. Some of these were continuously occupied up to the Middle Ages. The 'Stahlhauser" long-houses were built here, some up to 20 metres in length, one part of which was used as a residence while the other served as a barn. Comparatively few central and southern German settlements have been excavated, but these have yielded evidence of small column-structure buildings.

Burials of the north German population are known only in the eastern part: they are cremations, sometimes surrounded by a funerary mound. Male and female cemeteries were constructed separately. The ceramics display an intermingling of Jastorf and Harpstedt elements. In the east, the Jastorf cultural sphere in the broad sense encompasses the Warnow group of Mecklenburg and the Oder estuary, the related group along the Stettin coast, the Seen group of the south Mecklenburg lakes, and the Middle Elbe-Havel group.118

Special attention needs to be focussed on the Gubin group in the Oder-Neisse region. This is represented by two large cemeteries in Luboszyci near Zielona Gora and in Domaniowicy near Legnica. The Domaniowcy cemetery began with burials of the Pomeranian culture. At the time of the early "a" phase of NELT, it changes from a Pomeranian culture complex to one typical of the Gubin-type of Jastorf: this development occurs at the same time as the transformation of another Pomeranian culture burial complex in Nosocicy - only 20 kilometres to the east - into a Przeworsk cultural complex.120 The Gubin ceramics display some Przeworsk elements but earlier examples are generally similar to those of the Jastorf culture (early mingeling with R1a folks). These include polished and roughened bands on the vessels, urns covered with bowls, and the absence of weapons.

The historical events that caused the cultural changes in South-East Germany are unknown. One can only suggest that the Germans and non-Germans of the Jastorf culture were exerting pressure on the Celts and non-Celts of Central Europe. As a result a broad Jastorf-Celtic "contact" zone emerges in the middle reaches of the Elbe, in Saxony and Thuringia: simultaneously, northern groups proved to be under La Tène influence. The process of Latènisation had begun.
This development was accompanied not so much by a fundamental cultural transformation as by a relocation of monuments and groups, with old ones disappearing and new ones emerging. We know of at least 48 burial places in Northern Germany which were used through the early Jastorf and Ripdorf stages, whereas those spanning the Ripdorf and the later Seedorf number but two.121

The German pressure on the Celts increased progressively. The Jastorfers of Saxony, having probably partly absorbed the bearers of the local Billendorf culture, moved southwards into the Czech region, where a distinctive Bodenbach-Podmokly group was already emerging towards the end of LT B2. In turn, Celtic-type objects become widespread among the Jastorfers: these include mid- and late-La Tène fibulae, open-work belt tips, wheel-turned pottery, weaponry. The weapons (swords, spears, shield bosses) appear increasingly in burials, and warriors are increasingly placed in separate burial groups. The pottery remains three-part in design, but the long neck form disappears. The pottery consists primarily of bowl-pots, either polished or polished-and-roughened, often with small ear-handles or with stuck-on ornamental elements. Facetted rims appear and constitute a typical feature of the NELT epoch. The northern areas provide evidence of the popularity of metal Holstein belts made of square, decorated metal plates linked with chains: these are modelled on the chain-belts of Celtic women. These belts carry protruding crescent ornaments which, together with other occasional discoveries, might indicate more distant contacts with the Celtic-Illyrian population of southern Transdanubia.

These developments must have been gradual and probably spanned about two centuries. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to determine a chronology here, given that we have no exact absolute dates either for the upper limit of LT B or the beginning of LT C1, the beginning of NELT and its "a" and "b" stages, or the limits of LT C1 and LT C2.

It is also difficult to correlate historical and archaeological events even when datings exist for both. This is because an archaeological dating by its nature denotes a span of time while a historical dating fixes a point in time: thus, the time given by an archaeological dating may in reality span two or three different historical datings. This problem is magnified in relation to the Jastorf culture because the pace of change varies so much between its component groups.

The following approximate sequence of events can only be proposed very hypothetically. At some early point of "latènisation", perhaps when the Podmokly group was emerging in the Czech locale, the pressure of population moving southwards caused an exodus of some of the bearers of east Jastorf culture together with their eastern neighbours of the Pomeranian culture. Perhaps the pattern of this relocation can be traced by mapping the distribution of crown-shaped neckrings (Kronenhalsringe). Isolated examples of these artefacts, a symbol of power or some other attribute of German leaders and definitely not intended as objects of trade, have been found far to the south-east of the area where they predominate, i.e. Denmark, Northern Germany and Western Pomerania.122 They have been found in Rumania, contemporaneously with the Poianes,t,i-Lukashevka culture which bears many elements deriving from the eastern variant of Jastorf civilisation, particularly of the Gubin type.123 They have been found in the Ukraine, specifically in Vilkov within the Lvov area, in Zales'e within the Ternopol area, in Dashievo within the Vinnitsa area, and in the small village of Leski on the river Desna basin where four examples were found together (see illustrations 7, 16) (pretty much western Ukraine).124 All these discoveries were accidental and their relation either to local early Iron Age cultures or to the Zarubintsy culture which emerged here on the threshold of NELT remains unclear. But even if warrior bands headed by leaders who wore crown-shaped neckrings did not reach the Desna region, then they must have operated somewhere nearby and contributed, even if indirectly, to the conditions which gave rise to the Zarubintsy culture. These same conditions are also recorded in the northern Black Sea littoral at the turn of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC by the decree honouring Protogenos. At that time Olbia was newly-arrived Galatians and Sciri. We shall return to this later.

We could expect the next stage of basic change to come towards the end of the 2nd century BC, when, according to written sources, climatic change forced the inhabitants of Denmark and Northern Germany, in particular the Cimbri and Teutons, to move in search of new areas for settlement and thus to come into conflict first with the Celts and then with the legions of Marius.

But it remains unclear whether these marches caused the Celtic La Tène culture to shift from C2 to D1 or the cultures of the NELT area to cross from its early to middle stage or for that matter from phase "b" to "c" within the middle stage.*

Archaeology provides only indirect evidence of these marches. Perhaps it was the warriors returning from such expeditions to Denmark who brought with them trophies which were sacrificed to Germanic gods and cast into the marshes. This would explain the discovery in Denmark of the remains of chariots whose rich decorations included moustachioed Celtic masks125, as well as the famous Gundestrup silver cauldron decorated with a veritable pantheon of Celtic deities, probably the work of some eastern-Celtic-Thracian master from the middle Danube126 or a local artist who was familiar with Celtic and Dacian art objects.127 Perhaps at the same time other artefacts, such as the 3rd century BC Celtic cauldron found at Bro and the 5th-3rd century BC Graeco-Etruscan vessels found in an NELT burial at Lango, were brought northwards.128 Remarkable also is the discovery in Negovo on the Austro-Yugoslav frontier of a collection of some 20 Etruscan Alpine and Celtic bronze helmets: one of them bears the inscription "Harigasti Teiva", which is believed to be the oldest surviving example of an ancient German language.129 But it is not clear whether this discovery can be linked directly to the Cimbri.

The absence of fixed datings for the "a", "b" and "c" phases of NELT also prevents us from determining whether the Cimbri expeditions preceded, coincided with or followed on another major movement affecting the German and non-German tribes which archaeology has revealed. This development comprises the successive waves of change which affected material culture and settlement in Europe during the middle and beginning later stages of NELT: it was probably catalysed by the westward movement of the bearers of the Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures. A historical result of this process can be seen in the appearance in 58 BC on the Rhine of the forces of Ariovistus, which had already been on a continuous campaign for 14 years.130
This movement began in the early or middle stages of NELT, sometime between the mid-2nd and mid-lst centuries BC, during the prevalence of mid-La Tène fibulae variants A, B and C and the emergence of fibulae variants K, J and G/H. The westward movement of the "east Germans" left many traces, primarily in relation to the Przeworsk and Oksywie cultures,** and is manifest in the appearance of burials with bent weapons but without urns throughout the western regions as far as the Main.131

Apart from isolated discoveries and burials of eastern type, three compact groups of inhabitants originating from East Europe have been identified.132 One was situated where the Saale flows into the Elbe, another between the Saale and Unstrut rivers, and the third still further westward in the Wetterau region on the Main.133
At the same time, the Podmokly population expanded its Czech territory, absorbed some elements of the Przeworsk culture (especially the novel facetted rims on vessels) and metamorphosed into the new Kobyly culture.134

At about the same time, the Gubin cultural group adopted a number of Przeworsk elements, but then disappeared leaving its territory vacant.135

Somewhat earlier, on the threshold of the "a" and "b" phases of NELT, a number of Jastorf burial complexes in Western Pomerania were abandoned and in their stead appeared burials of the neighbouring Oksywie culture.136 The Jastorfers were either displaced or rapidly assimilated by the Oksywie population.

It is quite possible that all these developments are links in the same chain of events, and that the appearance of Ariovistus on the Rhine was but one episode in it.

This is not meant to suggest, however, that the Suebi and Ariovistus originated from Polish territory and that the graves with Przeworsk weapons are Suebi burials. Both were part of a larger stream, and are not necessarily one and the same. These are developments can be seen through both the historical and archaeological focus.

In the north German heartland of the Jastorf culture changes were at this time less pronounced, although they are discernable. A burial ritual characterised by the presence of weapons developed here (Harsefeld near Hannover) during the later NELT phase. In some territories the late NELT is characterised by a declining number of monuments, occasionally so drastic as to indicate total depopulation. This was clearly the case in Altmark, south-western Mecklenburg, and the middle reaches of the Havel.138

The process of change in Central Europe culminated in the mid-1st century BC, concurrently with the predominance of fibula variants K, J, G/H and the emergence of arched fibulae M-N (Geschweiftfibeln); the collapse of oppida in Thuringia, Bavaria, Moravia and the Czech lands139; the abandonment of certain burial complexes in western Germany140; the disappearance of the Kobyly group in Czech lands; and in the Rhine area the intermediate population (between Germans and Celts), characterised by a highly evolved social structure as well as the production of wheel-turned pottery and coins, was displaced by the poorer and more primitive Jastorf culture.142

The unique and spectacular culture of the Grossromstedt Horizon emerged as a result. The population coalesced into large groups. The burial fields of the time were generally colossal, but were not used for very long. The burials contained many weapons. The burial ritual was apparently borrowed from the Przeworsk culture, whose bearers possibly constituted the most active part of the new population. Men and women were generally buried separately, this aspect of the ritual originating in the Elbe region.

The pottery is characterised by tall vessels which are black polished and have smoothly curved setms. This pottery is sometimes called "situlae" on the assumption that it imitates Italian bronze buckets: however, the origins of the form should be sought in northern Europe, especially in Denmark. The fibulae are mostly the late La Tene arched variant M-N and variant 0 is very common.

The population's expansion drive clearly went southward and westward. The monuments of this cultural horizon are found in Altenwald on the Main, near Bamberg, in Wetterau on the lower Main, occasionally on the left bank of the Rhine (the Landau burial), on the mid-Rhine at Gladbach, and also in southern Bavaria in the Manching region (the Kronwinkl and Uttenhof fen burials with Grossromstedt features). The main concentration of finds lies however in the mid-Elbe region, Saale and Saxony. The Tišice type monuments from the Czech lands may also be related to this horizon. The latter sites ought to represent only the late phases of the horizon, i.e. subsequent to the Marcomanni migrations of 9-6 BC.145 The dating of the sites, however, remains a subject of controversy.146

It is quite reasonable to juxtapose the Grossromstedt horizon with the Suebi tribal federation. However, the Suebi in question were probably not contemporaries of Caesar or Ariovistus. They were the Suebi of the later 1st century BC, against whom the campaigns of Domitius Ahenobarbus were directed.

The northern limits of the Grossromstedt horizon are unclear. Some elements of this entity, most probably the social rather than the ethnic, are scattered throughout Germany: these include men's burials with weapons, black-polished situlae vases, and arched fibulae. Nowhere do they display such a unity as in Thuringia and Saxony, the area of the Suebian tribe of the Hermunduri. We must remember that we are speaking here of a horizon, not an archaeological culture. Most of the bearers of the culture represented by this horizon can be assumed to have originated primarily in the Elbe region. The development of this culture also involve the "east German" bearers of the Przeworsk tradition: their role in the development of the social structure and external shaping of this culture was probably comparable to the role of the Celts in the formation of Przeworsk culture.'
 
The timeline pretty much matches, even the estimated date of I2a Dinaric (2,500 years old) fits into this timeline. In the 2nd century B.C. the Scythians are invaded by the Samaritans and eventually are defeated. The fertile lands in western Ukraine are no longer subject to steppe tribe raids. The Gubin Jastorfers(feeling pressure form the north) decide it is better to migrate East and settle in former no-mans land. In their new territory their culture fusing with local culture form Zarubintsy culture which many see as proto-Slavic. If one research this culture one will find that this new culture was later subject to raids by the new steppe bosses, the Samaritan which forces the inhabitants of this culture to migrate northward into Belarus and north-east of the Dnieper River. I explained in my earlier posts how these events and later ones lead to the merger of a R1a and I2a folks into a single cultural complex and ethnic group.
The cultures that are assigned to Slavic people in 6th century are the Prague-Korcak (I2a and R1a, decendents of Zarubintsy, the tribes known as Sklaveni), Sukow culture (R1a decendents of Przeworsk, the tribes known as Wends and Polabian Slavs), and Penkovka culture (R1a, the tribes known as the Antes). The I2a Dinaric folks were literllay a wedge in the R1a folks and were eventually assimilated by them.

Kurgan
30-09-15, 21:39
I'm certain this study has been discussed at length:

http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2014/10/ancient-dna-from-prehistoric.html

What has blown me away is the oldest sample:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Gnh19OW6tcg/VEamwgP4XTI/AAAAAAAAJ0c/C0iD8CluhQE/s1600/ncomms6257-f3.jpg

The oldest neolithic sample KO1 (5650-5780) is a dark haired blue eyed man with I2a and "Armenian" mDNA R3.

Hmmm...

"Interestingly, haplogroup I reaches very high frequency in Sardinians (40.7%), specifically the I2a1a sub-haplogroup, which is virtually absent elsewhere. Haplogroup I was probably introduced there [Hungary] during the Neolithic by farmers with a Mesolithic paternal ancestry".

"All of the male neoliths (4) have either Y haplogroup I2a or C6, generally considered to be pre-neolithic."

"What is surprising is that one KO1 Neolithic European is with the hunter-gatherers (top of the plot). At some level you would expect to find some hunter-gatherers in the earliest Neolithic communities in Europe as Europe wasn't empty land when the early farmers showed up. And KO1 appears one of those guys, "caught in the act" of first contact between the two groups."

Jason Neuharth
13-10-15, 22:39
So there (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?25801-Sarmatians-Serbs-Croats-and-I2a2) are (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26761-Scythian-Sarmatian-DNA-your-thoughts.) several (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26201-Who-were-and-are-the-Albanians-and-their-DNA) threads (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?26473-Were-the-Croatians-originally-Slavic), all recently active, where the focus of the conversation has turned to (often passionate) discussions about how I2a1b1a-Din, the most common Haplogroup I subclade in the Balkans, got to the Balkans. But we seem far from reaching consensus on this forum, so here's a poll to at least put our finger to the wind regarding the direction this forum is leaning.

I've included as options several different possibilities I've read:

Paleolithic continuity: I2a-Din has been in the Balkans since the Paleolithic, and present distribution outside of the Balkans is the result of migrations out of it. There is direct geographic continuity for this clade from Gravettian culture and/or the Balkans Ice Age refuge. Proponents point out the age of Haplogroup I and the frequency distribution of I2a-Din. I've read Maciamo articulate this view, but I'm not sure if he still holds it.

The Early Indo-Europeans: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Indo-European migrations. It was part of the "original" collection of Y-DNA of Indo-Europeans. Proponents point out that everywhere that Haplogroup I is dominant nowadays speaks an IE language. How yes no was fond of this theory for a while.

Sea Peoples: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by seafaring groups not otherwise mentioned in this poll. The migration happened before history or early in history. Proponents point to the frequency distribution and the lack of historical verification for later migrations. How yes no explored this idea, and recently Pyrub has advocated it.

The Sarmatians: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Sarmatians. Proponents of this view cite the STR dating estimate for the clade, the apparent Asian spillover of it, and the historical attestation to Sarmatians (but not Slavs) in the Balkans. Bodin has been the most vocal advocate of this theory here.

The Slavs: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by expanding Slavs in the 1st millennium CE. Proponents cite the age of the clade, expert STR diversity analysis by people like Nordtvedt and Verenich, and dispute that history doesn't verify the Slavic expansions. I have supported this view, as have a few other posters.

If you believe that multiple expansions resulted in the current I2a-Din distribution in the Balkans, indicate which you feel brought most or had the greatest impact. If you feel that the data is deficient, make your best educated guess.
I would say the Natufians. In Between Paleolithic C1 haplogroup and The Early Indo-Europeans R1 Haplogroup.

ukaj
14-10-15, 10:10
I'm personally somewhat wary of any attempts of racial classification (since the concept of 'race' is in itself rather flawed), but I would like to add something on the origin of the Albanian language: the first and foremost is that Albanian is obviously an Indo-European language and that today, it represents it's own branch amongst the language family. The general consensus is also that Albanian is descended from one of the so-called Paleo-Balkan languages (eg. Illyrian, Dacian, Thracian, etc.), but which of these was the ancestor of Albanian is contested. The problem is that all of these languages are rather scarcely attested, whereas Albanian literature itself is only attested from the 14th century onward. This means it's very difficult to connect Albanian with a specific Paleo Balkan language with absolute certainty.Its hard but if you take a look at the pre indo european words we have you will be amazed of how much influence we have from proto balkans,Myself i belive we are Thracians their was tomb in bulgaria that was pulled up this year an tested the bodys.It is a possitve match with albanians their is few ev-13 mutations but this result is the same mutation of gheg albanians.The old dna sampled of the thracians tombs have revealed they have got it wrong.Anyway,I suppose dna dont lie.I belive i2a2 was bought with the mass slavnic migration an i belive it was more eastern europe than of balkan.

ThirdTerm
24-03-16, 23:02
Paleolithic continuity: I2a-Din has been in the Balkans since the Paleolithic, and present distribution outside of the Balkans is the result of migrations out of it. There is direct geographic continuity for this clade from Gravettian culture and/or the Balkans Ice Age refuge. Proponents point out the age of Haplogroup I and the frequency distribution of I2a-Din. I've read Maciamo articulate this view, but I'm not sure if he still holds it.

The Early Indo-Europeans: I2a-Din was brought to the Balkans by the Indo-European migrations. It was part of the "original" collection of Y-DNA of Indo-Europeans. Proponents point out that everywhere that Haplogroup I is dominant nowadays speaks an IE language. How yes no was fond of this theory for a while.


I think it's a combination of the two factors. I2a-L621 is closely associated with Slavic speakers with R1a and it was most likely to be introduced to the Balkans by Indo-European migrants to the region. On the other hand, a 13,000-year-old Cro-Magnon from Switzerland belonged to Y-DNA Haplogroup I2a. I2 is a southern branch of Haplogroup I which was widely dispersed around Europe, while the I1 branch largely remained in Scandinavia. I2a2 is associated with the pre-Celto-Germanic people concentrated in northern Germany. The Balkans was possibly another major EHG settlement with the highest concentration of I2 in Europe (over 50%) and this demographic trend was reinforced by further IE migrations to the region. Moreover, Sardinia is an I2a refuge (41%) and mass R1b migrations to southern Europe may have pushed the I2a people downward to Sardinia.

Dinarid
27-05-16, 02:39
I realize this topic has been untouch for months by now, but I have to contribute. I believe that I2a is both Slavic and indigenous Dinaric. I2a could have been that ancient Croats left the Balkans for Ukraine, and then migrated back southwest. Western Ukrainians have high frequencies of I2a, and many Ukrainian last names common in the west are supposed to be from the White Croats. Also the Cucuteni-Trypillians were I2 and located near the origin of the Slavs.

On the other hand, most of southern Europe would have been I2 before the Indo-Europeans, and it is hard to imagine what would have been there before R1a, R1b, J1, J2, E1b1b, etc. except for maybe some small amount of G in certain areas. I think we need to do more tests and research into what subclades of I2a1b came from when and just more tests for South Slavs, Vlachs, Gheg Albanians, etc. in particular.

LeBrok
27-05-16, 03:19
I realize this topic has been untouch for months by now, but I have to contribute. I believe that I2a is both Slavic and indigenous Dinaric. I2a could have been that ancient Croats left the Balkans for Ukraine, and then migrated back southwest. Western Ukrainians have high frequencies of I2a, and many Ukrainian last names common in the west are supposed to be from the White Croats. Also the Cucuteni-Trypillians were I2 and located near the origin of the Slavs.

On the other hand, most of southern Europe would have been I2 before the Indo-Europeans, and it is hard to imagine what would have been there before R1a, R1b, J1, J2, E1b1b, etc. except for maybe some small amount of G in certain areas. I think we need to do more tests and research into what subclades of I2a1b came from when and just more tests for South Slavs, Vlachs, Gheg Albanians, etc. in particular.
Then cast your vote here:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31334-What-is-the-main-haplogroup-of-Cucuteni-Trypillian-(Tripolye)-culture

Dinarid
27-05-16, 04:36
Thanks, I didn't see that.

Gisulf Langobardoru
13-06-16, 21:03
Why the Croats are blonde and the slovenian are black hair if they all descend from Sclaveni?

Dinarid
17-06-16, 23:30
I have actually seen more blond Slovenes and dark-haired Croats… at least there are very few blond-haired Herzegovinians (Bosnian Croats). We aren't necessarily descendants of the Sclaveni because there was another tribe; the Antes, and together they became Slavs. Also R1a in Croatia is only found at high frequencies in Slavonia where the most conservative elements of Slavic culture are found.

gyms
19-06-16, 10:22
I have actually seen more blond Slovenes and dark-haired Croats… at least there are very few blond-haired Herzegovinians (Bosnian Croats). We aren't necessarily descendants of the Sclaveni because there was another tribe; the Antes, and together they became Slavs. Also R1a in Croatia is only found at high frequencies in Slavonia where the most conservative elements of Slavic culture are found.
There was Avars,Bulgars and many others.

https://books.google.se/books?id=9lHeh36S8ooC&pg=PT703&lpg=PT703&dq=nomad+peoples+in+balkan+peninsula&source=bl&ots=POD-JrWsNf&sig=5wX2WPJzvv4NMfOnFSJk1Lx_RvY&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-o8-Y1LPNAhXDXiwKHY5IAvoQ6AEIHjAA#v=onepage&q=nomad%20peoples%20in%20balkan%20peninsula&f=false

Dinarid
21-06-16, 01:16
There was Avars,Bulgars and many others.

https://books.google.se/books?id=9lHeh36S8ooC&pg=PT703&lpg=PT703&dq=nomad+peoples+in+balkan+peninsula&source=bl&ots=POD-JrWsNf&sig=5wX2WPJzvv4NMfOnFSJk1Lx_RvY&hl=sv&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-o8-Y1LPNAhXDXiwKHY5IAvoQ6AEIHjAA#v=onepage&q=nomad%20peoples%20in%20balkan%20peninsula&f=false

Who, the Slavonians?

gyms
21-06-16, 10:42
Who, the Slavonians?

The Avars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Carpathians)) were a Turkic group (or possibly Mongol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongols_before_Genghis_Khan)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans#cite_note-15)), possibly with a ruling core derived from the Rouran (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouran) that escaped the Göktürks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks). They entered Pannonia in the 7th century AD, forcing the Lombards to flee to Italy. They continuously raided the Balkans, contributing to the general decline of the area that had begun centuries earlier. After their unsuccessful siege on Constantinople in 626, they limited themselves to Pannonia. They ruled over the Pannonian Slavs that had already inhabited the region. By the 10th century, the Avar confederacy collapsed due to internal conflicts, Frankish and Slavic attacks. The remnant Avars were subsequently absorbed by the Slavs and Magyars.
The Bulgars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars), a people of Central Asia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia), most believed Turko-Altaian and Indo-Arian.[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] The major Bulgar wave commenced with the arrival of Asparuh (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asparuh)'s Bulgars. Asparuh was one of Kubrat's, the Great Khan, successors. They had occupied the fertile plains of the Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine) for several centuries until the Khazars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars) swept their confederation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bulgaria) in the 660s and triggered their further migration. One part of them — under the leadership of Asparuh — headed southwest and settled in the 670s in present-day Bessarabia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessarabia). In 680 AD they invaded Moesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moesia) and Dobrudja (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobrudja) and formed a confederation with the local Slavic tribes who had migrated there a century earlier. After suffering a defeat at the hands of Bulgars and Slavs, the Byzantine Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire) recognised the sovereignty of Asparuh's Khanate in a subsequent treaty signed in 681 AD. The same year is usually regarded as the year of the establishment of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgaria) (see History of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bulgaria)). A smaller group of Bulgars under Khan Kouber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kouber) settled almost simultaneously in the Pelagonian plain in western Macedonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(region)) after spending some time in Panonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panonia). Some Bulgars actually entered Europe earlier with the Huns. After the disintegration of the Hunnic Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns#Unified_Empire_under_Attila) the Bulgars dispersed mostly to eastern Europé.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans

A. Papadimitriou
21-06-16, 13:12
The Avars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Carpathians)) were a Turkic group (or possibly Mongol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongols_before_Genghis_Khan)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans#cite_note-15)), possibly with a ruling core derived from the Rouran (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouran) that escaped the Göktürks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks). They entered Pannonia in the 7th century AD, forcing the Lombards to flee to Italy. They continuously raided the Balkans, contributing to the general decline of the area that had begun centuries earlier. After their unsuccessful siege on Constantinople in 626, they limited themselves to Pannonia. They ruled over the Pannonian Slavs that had already inhabited the region. By the 10th century, the Avar confederacy collapsed due to internal conflicts, Frankish and Slavic attacks. The remnant Avars were subsequently absorbed by the Slavs and Magyars.
The Bulgars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars), a people of Central Asia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia), most believed Turko-Altaian and Indo-Arian.[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] The major Bulgar wave commenced with the arrival of Asparuh (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asparuh)'s Bulgars. Asparuh was one of Kubrat's, the Great Khan, successors. They had occupied the fertile plains of the Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine) for several centuries until the Khazars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars) swept their confederation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bulgaria) in the 660s and triggered their further migration. One part of them — under the leadership of Asparuh — headed southwest and settled in the 670s in present-day Bessarabia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessarabia). In 680 AD they invaded Moesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moesia) and Dobrudja (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobrudja) and formed a confederation with the local Slavic tribes who had migrated there a century earlier. After suffering a defeat at the hands of Bulgars and Slavs, the Byzantine Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire) recognised the sovereignty of Asparuh's Khanate in a subsequent treaty signed in 681 AD. The same year is usually regarded as the year of the establishment of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgaria) (see History of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bulgaria)). A smaller group of Bulgars under Khan Kouber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kouber) settled almost simultaneously in the Pelagonian plain in western Macedonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(region)) after spending some time in Panonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panonia). Some Bulgars actually entered Europe earlier with the Huns. After the disintegration of the Hunnic Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns#Unified_Empire_under_Attila) the Bulgars dispersed mostly to eastern Europé.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans

There is at least one text that considers Balkan Avars part of the 'Sclavenic' nations. (De administrando imperio)

Dinarid
22-06-16, 09:43
The Avars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avars_(Carpathians)) were a Turkic group (or possibly Mongol (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongols_before_Genghis_Khan)[15] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans#cite_note-15)), possibly with a ruling core derived from the Rouran (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rouran) that escaped the Göktürks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6kt%C3%BCrks). They entered Pannonia in the 7th century AD, forcing the Lombards to flee to Italy. They continuously raided the Balkans, contributing to the general decline of the area that had begun centuries earlier. After their unsuccessful siege on Constantinople in 626, they limited themselves to Pannonia. They ruled over the Pannonian Slavs that had already inhabited the region. By the 10th century, the Avar confederacy collapsed due to internal conflicts, Frankish and Slavic attacks. The remnant Avars were subsequently absorbed by the Slavs and Magyars.
The Bulgars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgars), a people of Central Asia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Asia), most believed Turko-Altaian and Indo-Arian.[citation needed (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)] The major Bulgar wave commenced with the arrival of Asparuh (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asparuh)'s Bulgars. Asparuh was one of Kubrat's, the Great Khan, successors. They had occupied the fertile plains of the Ukraine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine) for several centuries until the Khazars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khazars) swept their confederation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bulgaria) in the 660s and triggered their further migration. One part of them — under the leadership of Asparuh — headed southwest and settled in the 670s in present-day Bessarabia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bessarabia). In 680 AD they invaded Moesia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moesia) and Dobrudja (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobrudja) and formed a confederation with the local Slavic tribes who had migrated there a century earlier. After suffering a defeat at the hands of Bulgars and Slavs, the Byzantine Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire) recognised the sovereignty of Asparuh's Khanate in a subsequent treaty signed in 681 AD. The same year is usually regarded as the year of the establishment of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgaria) (see History of Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Bulgaria)). A smaller group of Bulgars under Khan Kouber (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kouber) settled almost simultaneously in the Pelagonian plain in western Macedonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macedonia_(region)) after spending some time in Panonia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panonia). Some Bulgars actually entered Europe earlier with the Huns. After the disintegration of the Hunnic Empire (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns#Unified_Empire_under_Attila) the Bulgars dispersed mostly to eastern Europé.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Balkans

So are you saying that they were responsible for the R1a? According to Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-DNA_haplogroups_by_populations_of_the_Caucasus), Modern Avar men have only 1.7-2.4% R1a, and I fail to see how they would be different from the ancient population.

MaxCRO
03-07-16, 14:47
It's pre-Slavic, but it most likely came to Balkans with Slavic migrations.

There are no ancient findings of Dinaric-type I2 in southeastern Europe, yet. I would expect ancient Illyrians ans Thracians mainly carried haplogroups found in modern Albanians, rather than I2.

High frequencies of I2 among Romanians can be explained by Slavic settlements in Dacia, since they used Church Slavonic and had heavy Slav influenced-vocabulary, until linguistic purifications of 20th century.

MaxCRO
03-07-16, 14:49
There is at least one text that considers Balkan Avars part of the 'Sclavenic' nations. (De administrando imperio)

There are no ''Balkan Avars'' , as Avars settled mainly in Carpathian Basin.

They were most likely Turkic, mixed with Slavs and other peoples too, just like Huns.

Ohter than that, they weren't bilogically or ethnically Slavic for sure.

A. Papadimitriou
03-07-16, 16:19
There are no ''Balkan Avars'' , as Avars settled mainly in Carpathian Basin.

They were most likely Turkic, mixed with Slavs and other peoples too, just like Huns.

Ohter than that, they weren't bilogically or ethnically Slavic for sure.

I said 'Balkan Avars' to differentiate them from Caucasian Avars who speak a North-East Caucasian language. Others use terms like 'Pannonian Avars'.

In the text I mentioned a group called Avars is located near Danube (east of Dalmatia most likely) and are labeled as a 'Sclavenic nation'. Τhey expelled the Roman settlers of Dalmatia who were settled there by Diocletian and most of them were expelled from there by the Croats, That's the story in the text.


ἔθνη Σκλαβήνικα ἄοπλα ὄντα, ἅτινα καὶἌβαροι ἐκαλοῦντο.

It makes sense that they were Turkic. And it's likely that he called them 'Sclavenic' because when he wrote the text they had already been slavicized. Some have argued that he used Croat sources. The Avars who had remained there were a minority and it makes sense that they would have adopted the language of the majority.

I find annoying taking things for granted though.

MaxCRO
03-07-16, 16:42
I said 'Balkan Avars' to differentiate them from Caucasian Avars who speak a North-East Caucasian language. Others use terms like 'Pannonian Avars'.

In the text I mentioned a group called Avars is located near Danube (east of Dalmatia most likely) and are labeled as a 'Sclavenic nation'. Τhey expelled the Roman settlers of Dalmatia who were settled there by Diocletian and most of them were expelled from there by the Croats, That's the story in the text.



It makes sense that they were Turkic. And it's likely that he called them 'Sclavenic' because when he wrote the text they had already been slavicized. Some have argued that he used Croat sources. The Avars who had remained there were a minority and it makes sense that they would have adopted the language of the majority.

I find annoying taking things for granted though.

Alright, but we have to take Byzantine sources with reserve, as many appear to be hisorically not completely accurate.

Avars were allied with Slavs, but we can't know what the ratio of Avars to Slavs was. Possibly there were many Slavs, as Avars Khaganate later dissapeared and people couldn't have. Yet in countries like Hungary we find low frequencies of East Eurasian haplogroups, while R1a is frequent. I think remaining Avars (those that weren't exterminated by Croats or Franks ) assimilated in Panonnian populations, but they weren't originally Avar to begin with.

Avars could have been another mainly Slav group, led by Turkic elite. Yet the ''originals'' are definitelly not Slavic.

Their rampage in Dalmatia was short lasting, as well. The terrain did not fit horse riding group like them, and later they (and their unknown Slavic allies) were conquered by incoming Croats. According to sources Croats allowed defeated Avars to live and assimilate with them, but probably their numbers were so small they didn't seriously influence Croat ethnogenesis .

Milan
03-07-16, 17:02
For the Avars there is theories they were Iranic too,no written work survive.Taking in consideration they were steppe people and constantly on the move they could have spoken any language that was used as "lingua franca" at that time in the steppe.
But in the Avar kingdom later on Slavic becomed lingua franca and the spoken language.
For the Avar settlement i doubt they settled in the mountainous Balkans,that's why they choosed Pannonia which is extented steppe and suitable for their horses with pastures,they weren't sailors we know that they ordered the Sclavenes to make them ships and with combined force together with Persians besieged Constantinople.

Yetos
03-07-16, 17:14
I know also about That,
Avars were Iranian linguistic relatives,

Milan
03-07-16, 17:37
Alright, but we have to take Byzantine sources with reserve, as many appear to be hisorically not completely accurate.

Avars were allied with Slavs, but we can't know what the ratio of Avars to Slavs was. Possibly there were many Slavs, as Avars Khaganate later dissapeared and people couldn't have. Yet in countries like Hungary we find low frequencies of East Eurasian haplogroups, while R1a is frequent. I think remaining Avars (those that weren't exterminated by Croats or Franks ) assimilated in Panonnian populations, but they weren't originally Avar to begin with.

Avars could have been another mainly Slav group, led by Turkic elite. Yet the ''originals'' are definitelly not Slavic.

Their rampage in Dalmatia was short lasting, as well. The terrain did not fit horse riding group like them, and later they (and their unknown Slavic allies) were conquered by incoming Croats. According to sources Croats allowed defeated Avars to live and assimilate with them, but probably their numbers were so small they didn't seriously influence Croat ethnogenesis .
Croats appear as Avar enemies in the texts.
The narative later Constantine Porphyrogenitus is talking about that emperor Heraclius granted some land to Serbs or Croats,could be connected in fact with this alliances between them,anyway their migration is considered to have taken place right in this period.
The empire at the time of the siege.
http://www.theopavlidis.com/MidEast/files_of_part20/RE0623nGRAYmarked.jpg

hrvat22
06-07-16, 15:04
Croats appear as Avar enemies in the texts.
The narative later Constantine Porphyrogenitus is talking about that emperor Heraclius granted some land to Serbs or Croats,could be connected in fact with this alliances between them,anyway their migration is considered to have taken place right in this period.


You have Genetics and prove this, part with Serbs, you can not..

How can Serbians come as allies at same time, from same place and frome same Croatian ancestor when Porfirogenet claims that Serbs came from somewhere else to Greece and from Greece in part of Dalmatia...People with these genetic path do not exist..

Logical explanation for this is that they come as Croats, which are divided and become this or that..

MaxCRO
08-07-16, 11:31
You have Genetics and prove this, part with Serbs, you can not..

How can Serbians come as allies at same time, from same place and frome same Croatian ancestor when Porfirogenet claims that Serbs came from somewhere else to Greece and from Greece in part of Dalmatia...People with these genetic path do not exist..

Logical explanation for this is that they come as Croats, which are divided and become this or that..

It's ridiculous to claim Serbs came from Croats as everything points they were two closely related tribes living next to each other somwhere in Central Europe.

Proto-Croat and Proto-Serbs probably had similar haplogroup variety upon southern migrations.
To claim Byzantine sources as completely accurate now in 21st century, is pretty bold.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 11:43
I have debated this before on the Eupedia genetics comment board; in particular pages for Haplogroup I2 and sometimes R1a; and to my conclusion it is likely that Haplogroup I2 is an archaic Slavic lineage.


I also have a (premature) theory that Slavs may actually be the Dacians or Thracians. (or related) Which would explain why Yugoslavs carry more I2 at a higher frequency than other Slavs (R1a); just like their Romanian neighbors.

My theory is that the Yugoslavs are the more archaic Slavic people. Despite what Albanian nationalists may tell you; there is more evidence, conclusive to me, at least; that Albanians are nothing more than a Black-Sea people. And there was no Slavic invasion in 6 AD. (It could be; that Slavs are Dacians or Thracians, or related. Which would explain why both tribes and languages went extinct around these centuries; while the Slavic people were first written about during 5th or 6th AD.)

Korbyn
08-07-16, 11:56
In other words; I am suggesting that other Slavs, especially Western Slavs (Polish and Sorbians) may actually be Indo-Iranians that carry a high abundance of R1a. (this also may be the case with other R1a carrying Eastern Europeans - such as the Hungarians (Ugric) and even the Balts.

(If you ever get the chance; notice how Serbia has only 15% of R1a but is totally abundant in I2a. Same with Bosnians and Croats. While on the contrary; it seems that the Polish and Sorbs lack haplogroup I2a2 at a large frequency, which is very odd.)


There is also a tons load of historical evidence of a Scythian (Sarmatian and other Indo-Iranian) migration into the Carpathians. Some based on (mostly) Greco-Roman sources.

Another thing to consider is the high abundance of R1a and other haplogroups in Hungary; while it also lacks N1c abundance and Hungarians speak a Uralic tongue. Which >>> seems to suggest Hungary is a crossroads nation. Kind of like France or Italy.)

Am I suggesting that Western Slavs are actually Scythians (Indo-Iranians) that speak a Slavic language? And the Hungarians (Ugrics) are too -- Yes I am.

This hypothesis may also explain why traces of Indo-Iranian are found today in Hungarian culture. Such as the extinct Jassic (Ossetian) language: the Jassic dialect and Jassic language.

--

On the other hand; based on genetic and historical research ... the Albanians show more evidence with being from the East. (Caucasus and Anatolia) which seems to suggest they may be a Black Sea peoples. Could it be, perhaps Albanians are from Anatolia (or at least) relatives to the Phrygians? This would suggest the Albanians are not indigenous to the Balkans' and the Slavic peoples have more merit/evidence of longer habitation. << The only con to this theory is that Albanian is a satem language while Greek and Armenian are centum; and there seems to be little to no evidence of Anatolian or Illyrian either being centum or satem.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 12:22
Why the Croats are blonde and the slovenian are black hair if they all descend from Sclaveni?My only explanation is that Slovenia has had much more settlers in the region. (as well as possible indigenous peoples) and they may be mostly Slavic in genetics; but some or more or less of them have Germanic, Italic and possibly archaic Celtic admix.

What strikes me as very interesting about the Yugoslav people (south slavs) is that they tend to be, both male and female; extremely tall or above average in height for most Europeans. (kind of like Scandinavians or Dutch/Germans) however they lack similar features to Nords/Germanics - Perhaps it is the abundance of the I lineages, in the region.

Sorry if this explanation was too complex. (but to my knowledge; Slovenia and Hungary is a major European crossroads area - just like France and Italy. And lesser Poland, Scandinavia and Ireland -- where more homogeneity is seen.)

Edit: Also, from my observations ... This may also explain why Finns carry N1c but are also very tall. It may be haplogroup I. People with haplogroup I (both I1 and I2) often show very tall height. While R1b (from my observation) tends to have the shortest descendants. (Portugal for example: the average man is height 1.72m) R1a seems to be in the middle.

Also, European Mythology (or folk-wisdom) has always characterized the Celts as a "small" people. (In contrast to the Germanics and especially Nords,who are seen as taller.)

MaxCRO
08-07-16, 13:28
I have debated this before on the Eupedia genetics comment board; in particular pages for Haplogroup I2 and sometimes R1a; and to my conclusion it is likely that Haplogroup I2 is an archaic Slavic lineage.


I also have a (premature) theory that Slavs may actually be the Dacians or Thracians. (or related) Which would explain why Yugoslavs carry more I2 at a higher frequency than other Slavs (R1a); just like their Romanian neighbors.

My theory is that the Yugoslavs are the more archaic Slavic people. Despite what Albanian nationalists may tell you; there is more evidence, conclusive to me, at least; that Albanians are nothing more than a Black-Sea people. And there was no Slavic invasion in 6 AD. (It could be; that Slavs are Dacians or Thracians, or related. Which would explain why both tribes and languages went extinct around these centuries; while the Slavic people were first written about during 5th or 6th AD.)

I2 indeed is arhaic lineage, but it can't be proto-slavic since Slavic in indo-european language, and language proto-European I2 carriers spoke will never be known. Paleolithic European languages shifted to invading indo-european newscomers from steppes. Slavic in linguistic cathegory, so it makes sense to associate their marker with people who spoke it's earliest language variant.

I can't see any empirical evidence that Dacians or Thracians would be Slavic. Do you have any back up for such claims ?


In other words; I am suggesting that other Slavs, especially Western Slavs (Polish and Sorbians) may actually be Indo-Iranians that carry a high abundance of R1a. (this also may be the case with other R1a carrying Eastern Europeans - such as the Hungarians (Ugric) and even the Balts.

(If you ever get the chance; notice how Serbia has only 15% of R1a but is totally abundant in I2a. Same with Bosnians and Croats. While on the contrary; it seems that the Polish and Sorbs lack haplogroup I2a2 at a large frequency, which is very odd.)

R1a is Slavic marker, but not only marker that Slavic speakers carried. As already said, high prevalence of I2-dinaric among South Slavs could be due to founder effect.

Poles don't lack I2a, it is quite frequent in southeastern Poland. Indo-Iranians ? Please. Iranic clade of R1a is Z93, and Slavs have almost none of it.



There is also a tons load of historical evidence of a Scythian (Sarmatian and other Indo-Iranian) migration into the Carpathians. Some based on (mostly) Greco-Roman sources.

Another thing to consider is the high abundance of R1a and other haplogroups in Hungary; while it also lacks N1c abundance and Hungarians speak a Uralic tongue. Which >>> seems to suggest Hungary is a crossroads nation. Kind of like France or Italy.)

Am I suggesting that Western Slavs are actually Scythians (Indo-Iranians) that speak a Slavic language? And the Hungarians (Ugrics) are too -- Yes I am.

This hypothesis may also explain why traces of Indo-Iranian are found today in Hungarian culture. Such as the extinct Jassic (Ossetian) language: the Jassic dialect and Jassic language.Wrong.
On the other hand; based on genetic and historical research ... the Albanians show more evidence with being from the East. (Caucasus and Anatolia) which seems to suggest they may be a Black Sea peoples. Could it be, perhaps Albanians are from Anatolia (or at least) relatives to the Phrygians? This would suggest the Albanians are not indigenous to the Balkans' and the Slavic peoples have more merit/evidence of longer habitation. << The only con to this theory is that Albanian is a satem language while Greek and Armenian are centum; and there seems to be little to no evidence of Anatolian or Illyrian either being centum or satem.

How can Albanians be from east when their genetic overlap is with Central Italians (Tuscans) and Greeks (Greeks having more of eastern, Slavic ancestry).

No, Albanians are oldest inhabitants of Balkans and genetics celarly shows it, having Balkan specific Y-dna and native Balkan neolithic component in lot higher proportions than Southern Slavs.


My only explanation is that Slovenia has had much more settlers in the region. (as well as possible indigenous peoples) and they may be mostly Slavic in genetics; but some or more or less of them have Germanic, Italic and possibly archaic Celtic admix.

What strikes me as very interesting about the Yugoslav people (south slavs) is that they tend to be, both male and female; extremely tall or above average in height for most Europeans. (kind of like Scandinavians or Dutch/Germans) however they lack similar features to Nords/Germanics - Perhaps it is the abundance of the I lineages, in the region.

There are no Yugoslav people.

I sugest to stop using such simplified generalizations and study autosomal admixture of South Slavs. Regarding height, it varies. Herzegovina and Dalmatia are tallest which does seem connected to I2 hg. However it is not true for entire Croatia.


Sorry if this explanation was too complex. (but to my knowledge; Slovenia and Hungary is a major European crossroads area - just like France and Italy. And lesser Poland, Scandinavia and Ireland -- where more homogeneity is seen.)

Agreed with Hungary, but Slovenia is not very diverse. Croatia has been major crossroads, and our regional differeces are far greater than Slovene. Serbia is possibly even more diverse (at least genetically). Most homogenous southerstern Europeans are Kosovo Albanians.

Milan
08-07-16, 21:09
It's ridiculous to claim Serbs came from Croats as everything points they were two closely related tribes living next to each other somwhere in Central Europe.

Proto-Croat and Proto-Serbs probably had similar haplogroup variety upon southern migrations.

Where were this tribes?
All i can found for the name Serb for example in the middle ages in Serbia define social status and social organization,the "tribes" however were another matter and we have them by names.
When i say social status i mean like the commoners,plebs,warriors,nobility etc
Similarly Pohl proposed about the Croatians;
Pohl noted that the Kronsteiner's merit was that, instead of the previously usual "ethnic" ethnogenesis, he proposed a "social" one.As such, Croatian name would not be an ethnonym, but a social designation for a group of elite warriors which ruled over the conquered Slavic population.

Vlach for example was cattleman in various laws.

The same is true in later times Serb and likewise Bulgarian in Ottoman empire was denoting the Christians,plebs (commoners)
Nations came into being a bit later..

To claim Byzantine sources as completely accurate now in 21st century, is pretty bold.
True.

Korbyn
08-07-16, 21:33
I can't see any empirical evidence that Dacians or Thracians would be Slavic. Do you have any back up for such claims ?

Yes. Just translate english word "Fortress" to the various Southern Slavic dialects, and voila: you may be in for a surprise here:

tvrđava

https://translate.google.com/#en/bs/Fortress

Here is the classic location of a Dacian city, called Ziridava:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziridava#Etymology

In the Dacian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacian_language) (North Thracian) language dava (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dava_(Dacian)) means city, town, fortress.[10] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziridava#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPaliga200683-10)
Vasile Pârvan (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vasile_P%C3%A2rvan) considers that the form Ziri- is the same with a form Giri- (cf. Zermi and Germi).[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziridava#cite_note-FOOTNOTEP.C3.A2rvan1926253-9) Ziri- corresponds to the Proto-Indo-European root (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_root) ǵʰel- 'to shine, gold' so that Ziridava means "The gold fortress".[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ziridava#cite_note-FOOTNOTEPaliga2006208-11)

So this root-word "dava" seems to exist in the Southern Slav dialects, for Fortress; as well as the hypothetical Fortress in ancient Dacian/Thracian. But is totally absent in most other Slavic language groups. Could it just be linguistic borrowing? I think not. As well as the high abundance of Haplogroup I2 in South Slavs along with their neighbors the Romanians and Bulgarians; it seems to correlate that Slavs may have been related or are Dacians / Thracians.

More proof, is that Slavs were not documented until the 6th century AD:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs

(Also notice: By the 6th century AD, the various native Iranian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_peoples) ethnic groups of Eastern Europe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Europe), comprising the Scythians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scythians), Sarmatians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians), and Alans (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans) had been assimilated and absorbed (e.g. Slavicisation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavicisation)) by the Early (Proto)-Slavic population of the region.[3] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs#cite_note-3)[4] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs#cite_note-4)[5] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs#cite_note-5)[6] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_Slavs#cite_note-6) -- this seems to confirm my suspicions that Western Slavs especially; are actually Sarmatians that speak a Slavic tongue. Which is why they lack the Dinaric I2 in the Balkans.)


While, this is also the same history as when Dacians and Thracians both apparently went extinct:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dacian_language

"probably by the 6th century AD"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thracian_language

"Fifth century"

Korbyn
08-07-16, 21:44
How can Albanians be from east when their genetic overlap is with Central Italians (Tuscans) and Greeks (Greeks having more of eastern, Slavic ancestry).

No, Albanians are oldest inhabitants of Balkans and genetics celarly shows it, having Balkan specific Y-dna and native Balkan neolithic component in lot higher proportions than Southern Slavs.They are not the oldest inhabitants. What it shows is that they Albanians are the most homogeneous in the Balkans region, though. (that is quite evident, for the past century their population has increased almost 4x fold.) E-V13 can be found at a very high frequency in the Westernmost part of Turkey/Anatolia. And even parts of Crete and Greece. Look at this E-V13 map:

7833

However, in Italy E-V13 is almost as common as it is in Germany ... not a very reliable source to use Italy as an example. You can also notice a sharp uprise of E-V13 around the Caucasus / Iran / Azerbaijani borders. If Albanians truly are indigenous; then why is E-V13 missing in places like Sardinia and Basque country (more archaic DNA) at higher frequencies?

MaxCRO
09-07-16, 15:11
They are not the oldest inhabitants. What it shows is that they Albanians are the most homogeneous in the Balkans region, though. (that is quite evident, for the past century their population has increased almost 4x fold.) E-V13 can be found at a very high frequency in the Westernmost part of Turkey/Anatolia. And even parts of Crete and Greece. Look at this E-V13 map:

It's common in Greece and Anatolia exactly because it is native Balkan marker (V13 is European clade of Northeast African Hg E). Greeks lived in Western Anatolia before the Turks. It's their lagacy. Not to mention numerous Albanians that migrated to Ottoman Empire.

Yes, their population suddenly expolded and that is reason why they lack haplogroup variety. Albanians are not newscomers to Balkans because their aDNA is much more native to the peninsula than South Slavic is.



However, in Italy E-V13 is almost as common as it is in Germany ... not a very reliable source to use Italy as an example.
I'm talking about autosomal admixture, which is almost indistinguishable from Tuscans and Greeks.


If Albanians truly are indigenous; then why is E-V13 missing in places like Sardinia and Basque country (more archaic DNA) at higher frequencies?
Albania is not as isloated as your examples. Anyway, Balkans is closest to Anatolia, where presumably neolithic farmer E-carriers came from.

Indigenous is relative term. Thracian YDNA found in Balkan was R1a. It's not so simplistic as people assume. We need more ancient samples.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 15:48
I also don't buy that Albanians are Illyrians either. According to Greek mythology; the Illyrians may have merely been a large federation of Celtic Tribes. Kind of like Gauls:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Cyclops_Polyphemus_%26_Galatea_Family_Tree_(Greek_ Mythology)_(English).jpg/220px-Cyclops_Polyphemus_%26_Galatea_Family_Tree_(Greek_ Mythology)_(English).jpg


Also, here is a map that I found:

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s130/olvios300/Illyria/Illryians-1.jpg

Funny how it is surrounded by Celts in the Austro-Hungary area, and Gauls in the Alps area. And only parts of ancient "Illyria" cover modern day Albania. The Albanian theory of them being Illyrian is very weak.

My theory about the Slavs being derived from Dacian and Thracian may sound outlandish; but it seems to make perfect sense, at least to me. In any case, the only thing it proves (if it is correct) is that these Illyrians were merely Celts that migrated out of the Balkans, and it could be that Slavs (if relatives to Dacians?) only migrated there, possibly as a place of refuge. (remember the Roman conquest and they sacked the Thracians in the 5th and 6th century; modern day Romania and Bulgaria.)

I have an idea that Albanians may actually be from Anatolia - and possibly related to the Phrygians?

7834

--

Also, if I am correct about these theories ... this means that the Slavic invasion theory is nonsense - and suggests that Phrygians are the real invaders. (if Slavs are indeed Thracian or related to Thracians.)

Also, let it be known that Romans and Greeks saw Slavs as savages and Barbarians, just like Celts. And there is evidence of Roman leaders, especially Julius Caesar, writing bullcrap and slander on certain Celtic peoples. (like the Gauls) in order to provoke Roman soldiers into attacking them. So if Dacians/Thracians went extinct in 6th AD, and Slavs arrived then, it could be a smear campaign. And Slavs are actually the Dacians and Thracians that survived East Roman conquest.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 16:04
I'm talking about autosomal admixture, which is almost indistinguishable from Tuscans and Greeks.

If anything (in my case) this only proves that Albanians have some Greco-Roman or more preferably, Anatolian in them. Italy has it's fair share of Greek ancestry as well. (mostly in the Middle of Italy and the South.)

If I remember correctly; Italy has an Abereshe (catholic Albanian?) group in Italy. Which may be where some of this J2b is to be found on there:

7835

There is no doubt in my mind that the Albanians are NOT Illyrians; and are probably not even indigenous to the Balkans. It only proves to me that they came from the Caucasus or Anatolia region. The only reason they carry these specific haplogroups was because they were reduced to a small population; and then homogeneously interbred with each other, upon settling in the former Illyria / Greece area. Could it be that they are Phrygians? It would also explain why a lot of their neighbors (Greeks as well as Slavic peoples?) carry smaller proportions of J2b too.

The high frequency of J2b seen in Mordovians in Russia and even Ukrainians also seems to correlate with a Caucasus / Anatolian (Black Sea) origin for J2b.

LABERIA
09-07-16, 18:37
If anything (in my case) this only proves that Albanians have some Greco-Roman or more preferably, Anatolian in them. Italy has it's fair share of Greek ancestry as well. (mostly in the Middle of Italy and the South.)

If I remember correctly; Italy has an Abereshe (catholic Albanian?) group in Italy. Which may be where some of this J2b is to be found on there:

7835

There is no doubt in my mind that the Albanians are NOT Illyrians; and are probably not even indigenous to the Balkans. It only proves to me that they came from the Caucasus or Anatolia region. The only reason they carry these specific haplogroups was because they were reduced to a small population; and then homogeneously interbred with each other, upon settling in the former Illyria / Greece area. Could it be that they are Phrygians? It would also explain why a lot of their neighbors (Greeks as well as Slavic peoples?) carry smaller proportions of J2b too.

The high frequency of J2b seen in Mordovians in Russia and even Ukrainians also seems to correlate with a Caucasus / Anatolian (Black Sea) origin for J2b.

And at the conclusion of your theory, the Albanians are some emigrants from Asia and slavs are native populations of Balcanic Peninsula. lol.

Angela
09-07-16, 18:49
Phrygians[/B]? It would also explain why a lot of their neighbors (Greeks as well as Slavic peoples?) carry smaller proportions of J2b too.

The high frequency of J2b seen in Mordovians in Russia and even Ukrainians also seems to correlate with a Caucasus / Anatolian (Black Sea) origin for J2b.

There's no way you can know that. We find yDna related to E-V13 and we find J2 not too far from modern day Albania in the mid-to late Neolithic.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31364-Hg-J2-M172-middle-late-neolithic-Hungary-(Sopot-amp-Lengyel-Culture)?highlight=Sopot+culture

See also the results for this Thracian.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31540-Thracian-E-V13?highlight=Sopot+culture

We also know now that there was related yDna "E" in the Near East in the Neolithic, so I think the path into Europe is now pretty clear, and how early it was...

Arbereshe:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31370-Y-DNA-of-Arbereshe-vs-Albanians-vs-Southern-Italians?highlight=Sopot+culture

It is the "Slavic" y clades which are late arrivals into the Balcans.

Let's not derail this thread, though; it's about I2a Din

Hauteville
09-07-16, 19:17
I was thinking my I2a was Balkan but with a deep subclade my haplotype peaks among English and Germans.

MOESAN
09-07-16, 19:28
Why the Croats are blonde and the slovenian are black hair if they all descend from Sclaveni?


Do not be offensed, but your steep affirmation is a bit erroneous. Slovenians as a whole are just a bit "fairer" than Croatians. Central Northern Croatians are as fair if not a bit more, but Croatia is a strectched country with very different geography and pops according to places (as for pigmentation, as for stature and head:body forms.)
None of the two countries is fair as a whole, rather dark-middle or middle-dark. Dalmatian Croats and Bosnian Croats tend to be darker and taller. There is no question here of an opposition as Swedes against Portugueses for pigmentation (an obsession?).
For the Sclaveni, I avow at my great shame I never saw them!
By the way, these differences among Croats, even if not dramatic, show the today ethnicities can mask partly different origins in far past, almost in every country.
Often I forget to recall, but others do the work, that male Y-haplos, whatever their primal links with a genetic makup, lost a lot of these links over time; some moves implied males only or nearly, who took females on their way. Even when they had "their" females, even when a kind of osmosis took place, the ruling pops tended to pass more of their own Y haplos, but lost a part of their first auDNA.
Have a good week-end.

MOESAN
09-07-16, 20:07
My only explanation is that Slovenia has had much more settlers in the region. (as well as possible indigenous peoples) and they may be mostly Slavic in genetics; but some or more or less of them have Germanic, Italic and possibly archaic Celtic admix.

What strikes me as very interesting about the Yugoslav people (south slavs) is that they tend to be, both male and female; extremely tall or above average in height for most Europeans. (kind of like Scandinavians or Dutch/Germans) however they lack similar features to Nords/Germanics - Perhaps it is the abundance of the I lineages, in the region.

Sorry if this explanation was too complex. (but to my knowledge; Slovenia and Hungary is a major European crossroads area - just like France and Italy. And lesser Poland, Scandinavia and Ireland -- where more homogeneity is seen.)

Edit: Also, from my observations ... This may also explain why Finns carry N1c but are also very tall. It may be haplogroup I. People with haplogroup I (both I1 and I2) often show very tall height. While R1b (from my observation) tends to have the shortest descendants. (Portugal for example: the average man is height 1.72m) R1a seems to be in the middle.

Also, European Mythology (or folk-wisdom) has always characterized the Celts as a "small" people. (In contrast to the Germanics and especially Nords,who are seen as taller.)

The most I read this thread, the most I doubt of my eyes.
Where did you red (or guess) Celts were "small" in European Mythology (is there somewhere something like an "European Mythology"? Are you speaking of 'korrigans' of the Breton legends, or of the 'leaprechan's' (sorry for the spelling) of Ireland?
here are only some sources, Julius Caesr among them, saying the Celts were rather taller than the rather short Romans, but varying by regions and as a whole a bit shorter than the Germans. Nothing scientific here but surely some reality, nevertheless.
...
Y-I seems to me linked to Late Paleolithic/Early Mesolithic people, over the whole Europe. I1 were surely more northern but was not "scandinavian" because nobody lived in far North during LGL. And some found an Y-I1 among farmers in Neolithic Hungary.
I think Y-I2 was more spred (as well the ancestors of I2a1a, I2a1b and I2a2), and already separated by distance in more than a group, what can be verified by its today subclades broad and specific distribution.
Since we are doing bets, I suppose the most of I2a1b was centered around Balkans and Carpathians, in HGs world. A first flow of Y-G2 farmers from W-Anatolia had pushed a lot of them. Concerning Cucuteni-Tripolye final period, I wonder if a second Neolitic wave mostly Y-J2 and aware of some metal realities did not take the strong side upon a mix of first Y-G2 farmers and of pre-Neolithic Y-E-V13 - from Adriatic shores but expanded into the Central Balkans rivers network and became farmers too. The Y-I2 were denser in the highlands, refuges and in the Dniestr region; osmosis came after in Tripolye: the mixed males had a strong 'mediterranean' component when the females were more of 'archaic' types if I red well. It is even said (in Wiki?) that the 'archaii' element was rather stronger in the previous phases than later. So, reinforcement from southern people? Before colonization of the Steppes?
From this scheme we can suppose the Northern part of Tripolye was inhabited by more Y-I2 people of more 'archaic' types. It's this northern part which stayed aside the first (I-E?) moves westwards from Steppes (boomerang effect? Y-R1b dominant new people) and received later the most northern Y-R1a Balto-Slavic tribes before becoming the Slavs? They stayed aside because they were between mountainous North Carpathians and marsh lands, not too interesting at first sight. Among them the first rulers Y-J2/Y-EV13/Y-G2 lost weight in %s.
All the way, the lost in 'gedrosia' among Balts and Slavs cannot be pure hazard. It seems the 'gedrosia' rich tribes from East took a more southern road and colonized Europe before more northern Y-R1a imposed themselves in continental East-Europe, what they had begun to do in Northern Plain.
Concerning Y-I2a1 in ex-Yugoslavia and possible autochtony, I wait more clues about subclades. It could be possible there were very more Y-E1b-V13 people there...All bets.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 20:14
And at the conclusion of your theory, the Albanians are some emigrants from Asia and slavs are native populations of Balcanic Peninsula. lol.Not entirely, but somewhat true.

MOESAN
09-07-16, 20:23
Concerning Tripolye imput, let's look at maps about auDNA, and Y haplos G/J/E.
Concerning ratios Y-R1a/Y-I2a1b, it's possible first "true" Slavs (Pripet marsh?) had a stronger ratio I2/R1a? ('dinaric' types in West Ukraina: Galacia and Co). The more R1a shifted would be due to more Baltic? Or more simply, "true" Slavs were R1a but the most of the tribes who colonized West Balkans passed through Carpathians (some mtDNA surveys about today close but drifted pops in Galicia/Ruthenia with diverse links with Ukraina and Croatia)...

Korbyn
09-07-16, 20:27
The most I read this thread, the most I doubt of my eyes.
Where did you red (or guess) Celts were "small" in European Mythology (is there somewhere something like an "European Mythology"? Are you speaking of 'korrigans' of the Breton legends, or of the 'leaprechan's' (sorry for the spelling) of Ireland?
here are only some sources, Julius Caesr among them, saying the Celts were rather taller than the rather short Romans, but varying by regions and as a whole a bit shorter than the Germans. Nothing scientific here but surely some reality, nevertheless.
I meant small for Celts in terms of shortness. (height) and body morph. (Ectomorph to Mesomorph; skinny to normal)

Many Celts and non-Celts (such as the Greeks and Romans) documented that they (Celts) were a predominantly "tiny" people; also with very pale, milky skin. (average height for men was about possibly 177 cm (5'8, more or less) and for women it was probably about 157 cm (about 5'1 and a half, more or less) [to the contrary of Germans, who were about over 6 feet. (188 centimetre average for males?)

(I read somewhere that the Dutch have the most archaic Germanic ancestry. However, I do not know if that is true. But it could explain why they are so tall.)

This may have been a disadvantage to the Celts, since they waged war in a similar way like Germans; but were too small to be as tough or robust. If you dig deep in history; Greeks and Romans notified and referred to Celts, Germans and Slavs as "Barbarians" and "savage/uncivilized".

Angela
09-07-16, 20:33
The most I read this thread, the most I doubt of my eyes.
Where did you red (or guess) Celts were "small" in European Mythology (is there somewhere something like an "European Mythology"? Are you speaking of 'korrigans' of the Breton legends, or of the 'leaprechan's' (sorry for the spelling) of Ireland?
here are only some sources, Julius Caesr among them, saying the Celts were rather taller than the rather short Romans, but varying by regions and as a whole a bit shorter than the Germans. Nothing scientific here but surely some reality, nevertheless.
...
Y-I seems to me linked to Late Paleolithic/Early Mesolithic people, over the whole Europe. I1 were surely more northern but was not "scandinavian" because nobody lived in far North during LGL. And some found an Y-I1 among farmers in Neolithic Hungary.
I think Y-I2 was more spred (as well the ancestors of I2a1a, I2a1b and I2a2), and already separated by distance in more than a group, what can be verified by its today subclades broad and specific distribution.
Since we are doing bets, I suppose the most of I2a1b was centered around Balkans and Carpathians, in HGs world. A first flow of Y-G2 farmers from W-Anatolia had pushed a lot of them. Concerning Cucuteni-Tripolye final period, I wonder if a second Neolitic wave mostly Y-J2 and aware of some metal realities did not take the strong side upon a mix of first Y-G2 farmers and of pre-Neolithic Y-E-V13 - from Adriatic shores but expanded into the Central Balkans rivers network and became farmers too. The Y-I2 were denser in the highlands, refuges and in the Dniestr region; osmosis came after in Tripolye: the mixed males had a strong 'mediterranean' component when the females were more of 'archaic' types if I red well. It is even said (in Wiki?) that the 'archaii' element was rather stronger in the previous phases than later. So, reinforcement from southern people? Before colonization of the Steppes?
From this scheme we can suppose the Northern part of Tripolye was inhabited by more Y-I2 people of more 'archaic' types. It's this northern part which stayed aside the first (I-E?) moves westwards from Steppes (boomerang effect? Y-R1b dominant new people) and received later the most northern Y-R1a Balto-Slavic tribes before becoming the Slavs? They stayed aside because they were between mountainous North Carpathians and marsh lands, not too interesting at first sight. Among them the first rulers Y-J2/Y-EV13/Y-G2 lost weight in %s.
All the way, the lost in 'gedrosia' among Balts and Slavs cannot be pure hazard. It seems the 'gedrosia' rich tribes from East took a more southern road and colonized Europe before more northern Y-R1a imposed themselves in continental East-Europe, what they had begun to do in Northern Plain.
Concerning Y-I2a1 in ex-Yugoslavia and possible autochtony, I wait more clues about subclades. It could be possible there were very more Y-E1b-V13 people there...All bets.

It's the alternative anthrofora universe where you don't need any data to support the things you affirm.

http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by LABERIA http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=483669#post483669)
And at the conclusion of your theory, the Albanians are some emigrants from Asia and slavs are native populations of Balcanic Peninsula. lol.




Korbyn: Not entirely, but somewhat true.

Both modern and ancient dna and linguistics strongly suggest that the Slavs are the late comers to the Balkans. Of course, modern south Slavs have ancestry from the Neolithic migrations, the Copper Age and Bronze Age migrations, and the Slavic migrations. Each ethnic group just has different percentages of those ancient, now extinct populations.

Milan
09-07-16, 20:33
"Dinaric" among other "racial" types was more process of evolution perhaps could be tied to certain haplogroup that was dominant in the said region or maybe not.
As far the Dinaric noses goes long ago i have read article that such noses evolve due to mountainous region,the sharp air on height.
So i personally doubt that kind of appearance came from Ukraine in the 6th century,or earlier the steppe,since the appearance of "Illyrians" and "Thracians" we know from coins,statues,roman emperors many of which had Dinaric appearance.
Finally the haplogroup "I" carriers i think are tallest in Europe and they contributed to that.Even nowadays where we find the tallest people the dominant haplogroup is I whether I2 in Balkans or I1 in Northern Europe.
That is just my opinion.

Milan
09-07-16, 20:40
It's the alternative anthrofora universe where you don't need any data to support the things you affirm.

http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by LABERIA http://cdn.eupedia.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.eupedia.com/forum/showthread.php?p=483669#post483669)
And at the conclusion of your theory, the Albanians are some emigrants from Asia and slavs are native populations of Balcanic Peninsula. lol.





Both modern and ancient dna and linguistics strongly suggest that the Slavs are the late comers to the Balkans. Of course, modern south Slavs have ancestry from the Neolithic migrations, the Copper Age and Bronze Age migrations, and the Slavic migrations. Each ethnic group just has different percentages of those ancient, now extinct populations.
How is that true,have you compared for example the inhabitants from Bulgaria and Macedonia to northern Greeks or Central or Southern Albanian and what is the difference between haplogroups there?which haplgroups is later or newer? how you sort them i would be curious to know? let's leave the languages alone from haplogroups,not always they go hand in hand.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 20:44
There's no way you can know that. We find yDna related to E-V13 and we find J2 not too far from modern day Albania in the mid-to late Neolithic.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31364-Hg-J2-M172-middle-late-neolithic-Hungary-(Sopot-amp-Lengyel-Culture)?highlight=Sopot+culture

See also the results for this Thracian.
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31540-Thracian-E-V13?highlight=Sopot+culture

We also know now that there was related yDna "E" in the Near East in the Neolithic, so I think the path into Europe is now pretty clear, and how early it was...

Arbereshe:
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31370-Y-DNA-of-Arbereshe-vs-Albanians-vs-Southern-Italians?highlight=Sopot+culture

It is the "Slavic" y clades which are late arrivals into the Balcans.

Let's not derail this thread, though; it's about I2a DinI don't have sources or anything. But this hardly convinces me otherwise. Sorry. The Sumerians of modern Iraq were believed to be both J1 and J2, predominantly. Possibly some R1b and R1a as well. So to say that J2 or even J1 are archaic in Albanians and even other Europeans, seems a bit silly to me. (even if it were true; it does not discredit my Albanian migration theory.) Also, another thing to consider is that Albanians' third most common haplogroup is Greco-Anatolian R1b. (found exclusively among Greeks, Northern Turkey and even Armenia.):

7836

If anything; the unusual Y-DNA patterns in the Albanians suggests to me that they are more homogeneous; and lesser indigenous. We must also remember that Southern Slavs as well as Greeks carry the E-V13 and J1b (subclade) as well. If anything; it points to Albanians picking up these haplogroups, and afterwards (after this admixture) they also somehow became homogeneous. (this would make sense, seeing as Albania about a century ago was nearly less than 1 million people.)

Edit: It is also very interesting that both R1b and the J2b subclade appear in Mordovians at a higher than average frequency. It definitely suggests to me now, upon seeing this map; Albanians definitely arrived into the Balkans from near the Black Sea. Greco-Anatolian R1b and the subclade of J2b found in both Albanians and (ahem, uralic speaking) Mordovians seems like there may be some kind of link, here. I have no idea where the E-V13 came from. Possibly; it was picked up by Albanians from indigenous Balkanic peoples, whom later assimilated into Albanians? It would also explain why Greeks and South Slavs also have a higher than average abundance of E-V13. This would be the only stump or con to my theory for a more recent Albanian migration -- but I am also thinking more that their E-V13 is exaggerated, simply because of homogeneity.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 21:01
Both modern and ancient dna and linguistics strongly suggest that the Slavs are the late comers to the Balkans. Of course, modern south Slavs have ancestry from the Neolithic migrations, the Copper Age and Bronze Age migrations, and the Slavic migrations. Each ethnic group just has different percentages of those ancient, now extinct populations.My only explanation for that; is what I stated above. I believe that Slavs may very well be related or relative to Thracians or Dacians.

And if I am right about Illyrians being merely a federation of Celts put on a map (just like Gauls) and not a distinct tribe of it's own culture/tongue; then that means many of these Illyrian supposed "Celts" migrated out of the Balkans to the North and/or West. That would leave the door open for Slavs to later migrate (or "invade", which I doubt) into former Illyria. But this here could possibly be an explanation for why Dinaric I2 is more recent/young. (it may have nothing to do with Slavic invasion.)

Edit: in other words, whomever this Illyrians were (if not Albanians or even Slavs or Thracians) - I am basically saying that before 5 or 6 AD; they obviously left the Balkans. I could see no other place to migrate but Northern and/or Western. My belief right now, is that Illyrians may have been a distinct Celtic tribe of some sort.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrians#Illyrians_in_Greek_mythology

Also, notice the image to the right:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Cyclops_Polyphemus_%26_Galatea_Family_Tree_%28Gree k_Mythology%29_%28English%29.jpg

Where the Greeks mythologically seem to suggest that these "Illyrians" have more in common with Celts.


Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_languages#Celtic

It seems to me that the name borrowings in Illyrian are more plentiful in Celtic than in Greek or even Thracian. This is particularly interesting; and raises the question of why Albanians lost a substantial amount of Celtic influence (to me); if they are indeed descendants of Illyrians. Makes no sense to me.

Sile
09-07-16, 21:11
"Dinaric" among other "racial" types was more process of evolution perhaps could be tied to certain haplogroup that was dominant in the said region or maybe not.
As far the Dinaric noses goes long ago i have read article that such noses evolve due to mountainous region,the sharp air on height.
So i personally doubt that kind of appearance came from Ukraine in the 6th century,or earlier the steppe,since the appearance of "Illyrians" and "Thracians" we know from coins,statues,roman emperors many of which had Dinaric appearance.
Finally the haplogroup "I" carriers i think are tallest in Europe and they contributed to that.Even nowadays where we find the tallest people the dominant haplogroup is I whether I2 in Balkans or I1 in Northern Europe.
That is just my opinion.

In the copper-age in North-Italy .....100% of all Remedello culture samples are I2a ...........there is also the swiss sample of Bichon who is I2a

I do not know which story you are trying to portray for these I2 people that you speak about

Sile
09-07-16, 21:17
My only explanation for that; is what I stated above. I believe that Slavs may very well be related or relative to Thracians or Dacians.

And if I am right about Illyrians being merely a federation of Celts put on a map (just like Gauls) and not a distinct tribe of it's own culture/tongue; then that means many of these Illyrian supposed "Celts" migrated out of the Balkans to the North and/or West. That would leave the door open for Slavs to later migrate (or "invade", which I doubt) into former Illyria. But this here could possibly be an explanation for why Dinaric I2 is more recent/young. (it may have nothing to do with Slavic invasion.)

Edit: in other words, whomever this Illyrians were (if not Albanians or even Slavs or Thracians) - I am basically saying that before 5 or 6 AD; they obviously left the Balkans. I could see no other place to migrate but Northern and/or Western. My belief right now, is that Illyrians may have been a distinct Celtic tribe of some sort.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrians#Illyrians_in_Greek_mythology

Also, notice the image to the right:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ea/Cyclops_Polyphemus_%26_Galatea_Family_Tree_%28Gree k_Mythology%29_%28English%29.jpg

Where the Greeks mythologically seem to suggest that these "Illyrians" have more in common with Celts.


Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illyrian_languages#Celtic

It seems to me that the name borrowings in Illyrian are more plentiful in Celtic than in Greek or even Thracian. This is particularly interesting; and raises the question of why Albanians lost a substantial amount of Celtic influence (to me); if they are indeed descendants of Illyrians. Makes no sense to me.


The Gallic peoplewhere the biggest race in
bronze-age Europe.

they had all France, Belgium, north-italy, southern and central Germany, Switzerland and western Austria..............they neighboured the illyrians of eastern Austria and then started to absorb them into gallic/celtic culture. by 250 BC the illyrians had been celtinized.
There was even a failed campaign to bring Greece under gallic/celtic rule

Sile
09-07-16, 21:29
IMO
The illyrians bordered the lusatian culture and their origins where eastern Austria and Hungaria ( pannonia ) lands ...........over time they moved south and either replaced or absorbed the thracians in the western balkans.
By the time of the Great illyrian revolt against Rome, they massed mostly in pannonia and central bosnia.

I doubt very much these "illyrians" saw themselves as one ethnic race ............I believe they where only named Illyrians because of the Greeks and also because Rome called the area they resided as Illyricum ( celtic name )

Korbyn
09-07-16, 21:37
How is that true,have you compared for example the inhabitants from Bulgaria and Macedonia to northern Greeks or Central or Southern Albanian and what is the difference between haplogroups there?which haplgroups is later or newer? how you sort them i would be curious to know? let's leave the languages alone from haplogroups,not always they go hand in hand.Couldn't agree more. Apparently what people fail to realize is that Albanians carry E-V13 at an enormous amount, because as stated before; they have bred very high for the last century; after independence from the Ottoman Empire. They are merely homogeneous, which is why E-V13 is so high. Not because they are indigenous.

The Kosovars have more E-V13 but the samples are too small to be conclusive. (less than 50-100 samples taken from Kosovar men? And most were E-V13? How is this proof of anything? 1,000 Kosovar Albanian samples would be more defined, and E-V13 would probably dwindle down to average to below average, in the Balkans. Maybe even Serbs or Bulgarians would surpass them in E-V13 frequency. I would not at all, be surprised.)

Angela
09-07-16, 21:46
I would advise newer members to read large portions of this thread. It's very long, and some of it was written before the newest genetic discoveries, so perhaps starting around page 22 might be a good idea. It's all there.

These are also good threads.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105090
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/30366-The-Balkans-as-Genetic-Corridor?highlight=Bosnians

I would also just suggest that on this site no one is very interested in wild speculation. If you have no data to support your positions or if what your are saying is in direct opposition to the data, no one is going to take your positions seriously or be persuaded by them.

Angela
09-07-16, 21:57
Couldn't agree more. Apparently what people fail to realize is that Albanians carry E-V13 at an enormous amount, because as stated before; they have bred very high for the last century; after independence from the Ottoman Empire. They are merely homogeneous, which is why E-V13 is so high. Not because they are indigenous.

The Kosovars have more E-V13 but the samples are too small to be conclusive. (less than 50-100 samples taken from Kosovar men? And most were E-V13? How is this proof of anything? 1,000 Kosovar Albanian samples would be more defined, and E-V13 would probably dwindle down to average to below average, in the Balkans. Maybe even Serbs or Bulgarians would surpass them in E-V13 frequency. I would not at all, be surprised.)

The precursor to E-V13 has been in southeastern Europe since the mid-to-late Neolithic. Analysis of it shows a large expansion in the Bronze Age. That has been known for years. That is "proof" that the possession of it by the Albanians is not proof of recent arrival from West Asia. There is in fact no "proof" of their recent arrival from West Asia. Any insistence upon such ludicrous propaganda is ********, and I take a very dim view of that. I hate to have to put on my moderator hat, but please be advised. There is no place here for that kind of thing.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 22:10
The precursor to E-V13 has been in southeastern Europe since the mid-to-late Neolithic. Analysis of it shows a large expansion in the Bronze Age. That has been known for years. That is "proof" that the possession of it by the Albanians is not proof of recent arrival from West Asia. There is in fact no "proof" of their recent arrival from West Asia. Any insistence upon such ludicrous propaganda is ********, and I take a very dim view of that. I hate to have to put on my moderator hat, but please be advised. There is no place here for that kind of thing.Why? As I stated before; while it may be true that E-V13 is ancient to the region of the Balkans; it still does not explain the abundance of E-V13 in neighboring Balkanic countries. Such as the higher than average frequency in the Balkans seen in Greeks and Bulgarians, correlating with the Albanian peak.

If anything, it only shows (to me, at least) that Albanians may have assimilated these E-V13 peoples and they became Albanian, if my theory so-far is correct. Just like E-V13 peoples became assimilated Greeks; E-V13 peoples became Southern Slavs. Or even Romanians; and so on.

A very good Basque anthropologist and friend of mine; found sources and came up with a theory that Etruscans may have been indigenous to Italy, before the Romans and Greeks settled there:

http://forwhattheywereweare.blogspot.com/2013/02/were-etruscans-after-all-native-italians.html

That would be a new twist to the origins of Etruscans; if this theory were true. I hate to jump forward with speculations; but maybe indigenous Italians, Balkan peoples and Anatolians originally spoke Tyrsenian?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyrsenian_languages

Angela
09-07-16, 22:10
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristiina_Tambets/publication/264985653/viewer/AS:[email protected]/background/4.png

None of you are Ukrainians, much less northern Slavs, and none of you are Armenians/Georgians either. You're a hybrid. The sooner you all accept it, the better for the rest of Europe.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 22:17
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristiina_Tambets/publication/264985653/viewer/AS:[email protected]/background/4.png

None of you are Ukrainians, much less northern Slavs, and none of you are Armenians/Georgians either. You're a hybrid. The sooner you all accept it, the better for the rest of Europe.What is this post insinuating? That the Slavic people are evil Barbarian monsters? I have heard that one all before, and it's a tired theory. So is the theory that Illyrians are Albanians. (everyone seems to jump on these theoretical bandwagons, which lack evidence and may not even be true.)

If anyone is turning people into monsters, it's the people who blame Southern Slavs if you ask me. If Albanians are indigenous to the region; how come the Greeks have not noticed them since the 14th century? Did they overlook these small people? How could the Greeks, if they had been there since pre-history? That's very un-Greek of them. There are loads of questions to ask about Albanians. And to me, there is proof stacked more against them that they are recent rather than indigenous. The Dinaric I2 found in Slavs being "younger" does not suggest anything to me at all. What it does suggest is that it is just exactly that: a recent mutation.


Also, even the Greeks would and have admitted this, but the Romans have been responsible for more innocent killings and deaths than most (if not the most) than any other European peoples.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 22:29
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kristiina_Tambets/publication/264985653/viewer/AS:[email protected]/background/4.png

None of you are Ukrainians, much less northern Slavs, and none of you are Armenians/Georgians either. You're a hybrid. The sooner you all accept it, the better for the rest of Europe.Funny how on this genetics map, it is apparent that Croatians share the most with Ukrainians. And the people that share the most with Armenians here, are coincidentally Greeks, Cypriots and you guessed it: Kosovar Albanians. (that little pink and orange, you see?)

While it is true that Italians show a similarity to Armenians as well; it only furthers my theory that Albanians came from the East fairly recently. And, where did the ancient Phrygians from Anatolia go? Were they the E-V13 carriers that assimilated into various Balkan cultures?

Angela
09-07-16, 22:36
What is this post insinuating? That the Slavic people are evil Barbarian monsters? I have heard that one all before, and it's a tired theory. So is the theory that Illyrians are Albanians. (everyone seems to jump on these theoretical bandwagons, which lack evidence and may not even be true.)

If anyone is turning people into monsters, it's the people who blame Southern Slavs if you ask me. If Albanians are indigenous to the region; how come the Greeks have not noticed them since the 14th century? Did they overlook these small people? How could the Greeks, if they had been there since pre-history? That's very un-Greek of them. There are loads of questions to ask about Albanians. And to me, there is proof stacked more against them that they are recent. The Dinaric I2 being "younger" does not suggest anything to me at all.


Also, even the Greeks would and have admitted this, but the Romans have been responsible for more innocent killings and deaths than most (if not the most) than any other European peoples.

What on earth are you talking about? It's not insinuating anything. It's proving that the southern slavs, all of them, are much alike, and that there was obviously a northern Slav movement into the Balkans, as is indeed clear from the archaeology, during the Great Migration period which assimilated the pre-existing people of the Balkans. Some groups were more isolated or further south, and didn't get as much of it.

If you don't like what the genetics and the linguistics show about the population genetics of the Balkans, it's not my problem, it's your problem.

There is NO genetic proof that the Albanians were brought to the Balkans by the Turks if that's the propaganda to which you are referring.

Also, your last comment is totally off topic.

I would suggest you read all the genetics papers to which I linked upthread before commenting further.

Also be sure to read Ralph and Coop on Balkan IBD sharing with Slavs and the period to which it is dated. Albanians are also included in the analysis.

http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001555

There's absolutely no rational way to deny that Slavs and the Slavic languages are newcomers in the Balkans.

I'm not going to be responding to any more unsubstantiated claims.


Funny how on this genetics map, it is apparent that Croatians share the most with Ukrainians. And the people that share the most with Armenians here, are coincidentally Greeks, Cypriots and you guessed it: Kosovar Albanians. (that little pink and orange, you see?)

While it is true that Italians show a similarity to Armenians as well; it only furthers my theory that Albanians came from the East fairly recently. And, where did the ancient Phrygians from Anatolia go? Were they the E-V13 carriers that assimilated into various Balkan cultures?

Just READ some genetics papers. What do you think the people in the Balkans were like before the Slavs arrived? We still had groups that were "Sardinian like" after the Indo-European invasions. I'm sorry, but this kind of stuff isn't worthy of a response, so don't expect any. This is a quasi-scientific site. If you just want to spout your old, unsourced propaganda, this isn't the site for you.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 22:49
I never stated any of that. If you go back and read ... I took a look at the post/link you posted and even more, I opened the webpage that Aberdeen linked to and even the map... and meticulously researched and came up with my own analysis.

Where have I ever mentioned the Turks forcing your beloved and innocent Albanians to migrating to the Albanian homeland? I only mentioned when the Ottoman Empire was that they were freed. (in 1912 of course..) Turks did not force Albanians to where they are. That's not how it happened; and not what I suggested..


Also, your last comment is totally off topic. No it isn't ... I gave my analysis on Dinarid I2. As many times before... and likewise you overlooked it once again...

No one had a problem with my "ludicrous theories" until you passively seemed to suggest that it was discriminatory or with nationalist intentions.. Even someone like Sile seem to dignify my apparent "ludicrous" hypothesis/speculations. (I'm not saying they are 100% true, no. But there is a great chance that I may be right, on most of 'em.)

I think even the Albanian here who made a comment, was showing at least some interest, as well.

And you have yet to answer me this: if Greeks are so good at history: why, even in Byzantine times, have the Greeks not noticed the Albanians until the 14th-15th centuries, just like the Slavs? And where did the Phyrgians go off to? Did they join the Greek culture?

Angela
09-07-16, 22:59
Even if I'm a moderator here, I can't read every post of every thread. I had no idea people were posting things again that we've known for ages are manifestly untrue.

You obviously haven't read all the papers to which I linked or you couldn't be saying the things you're saying. If nothing else, I posted Ralph and Coop a few minutes ago, and the admixture chart seems a surprise to you.

Everything agrees. You're all very close cousins, with very minute differences between you. It may not be what you were taught, but it's the reality.

As for your inter-Balkan warfare, I take no sides politically. I've seen mad statements from all sides, and there were atrocities on all sides, although what was done to the Muslims is on a different level. If they are disaffected it's hardly to be wondered at.

This, and the various other threads and papers to which I linked, are genetics based. I try, as do a lot of our posters, to be as objective about data as possible. As we say here, I have no dog in the race.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 23:04
If you don't like what the genetics and the linguistics show about the population genetics of the Balkans, it's not my problem, it's your problem.It isn't my problem. You've got it all wrong. Twist it backwards. The Albanians already are a linguistic isolate; the Slavs are not.


There's absolutely no rational way to deny that Slavs and the Slavic languages are newcomers in the Balkans.

I'm not going to be responding to any more unsubstantiated claims.


Just READ some genetics papers. What do you think the people in the Balkans were like before the Slavs arrived? We still had groups that were "Sardinian like" after the Indo-European invasions. I'm sorry, but this kind of stuff isn't worthy of a response, so don't expect any. This is a quasi-scientific site. If you just want to spout your old, unsourced propaganda, this isn't the site for you.I'll twist it backward: There's absolutely no rational way to deny that Albanians and the Albanian languages are newcomers in the Balkans.

So where did the Slavs come from, before 6th century AD then? The Greeks and Romans are so good at history they documented the Persians, Scythians, Celts and Germans for millenia, but suddenly the Slavs and the Albanians are a mystery?

Albanians are a linguistic isolate. What you are insinuating (and you are, by the way...) is that a Slavic invasion occurred, which overtook or murdered the native speakers of Albanian or something similar...

There was no propaganda ... but I can detect an agenda and bias already instilled in you, Angela. Which seems like a self-projection on-towards me. If anyone is leading this topic about I2a Dinarid astray, it is not me- it's you.

Korbyn
09-07-16, 23:05
Even if I'm a moderator here, I can't read every post of every thread. I had no idea people were posting things again that we've known for ages are manifestly untrue.

You obviously haven't read all the papers to which I linked or you couldn't be saying the things you're saying. If nothing else, I posted Ralph and Coop a few minutes ago, and the admixture chart seems a surprise to you.

Everything agrees. You're all very close cousins, with very minute differences between you. It may not be what you were taught, but it's the reality.

As for your inter-Balkan warfare, I take no sides politically. I've seen mad statements from all sides, and there were atrocities on all sides, although what was done to the Muslims is on a different level. If they are disaffected it's hardly to be wondered at.

This, and the various other threads and papers to which I linked, are genetics based. I try, as do a lot of our posters, to be as objective about data as possible. As we say here, I have no dog in the race.Sure seems like it. (you are holding an agenda). And as I posted just now, it seems you are becoming touchy and are self-projecting your own delusions onto me..

Sile
10-07-16, 00:41
It isn't my problem. You've got it all wrong. Twist it backwards. The Albanians already are a linguistic isolate; the Slavs are not.



I'll twist it backward: There's absolutely no rational way to deny that Albanians and the Albanian languages are newcomers in the Balkans.

So where did the Slavs come from, before 6th century AD then? The Greeks and Romans are so good at history they documented the Persians, Scythians, Celts and Germans for millenia, but suddenly the Slavs and the Albanians are a mystery?

Albanians are a linguistic isolate. What you are insinuating (and you are, by the way...) is that a Slavic invasion occurred, which overtook or murdered the native speakers of Albanian or something similar...

There was no propaganda ... but I can detect an agenda and bias already instilled in you, Angela. Which seems like a self-projection on-towards me. If anyone is leading this topic about I2a Dinarid astray, it is not me- it's you.

The south slavic migration ( ~600AD ) happened after the gothic/barbarian invasion of the roman empire ~400AD . The slavs first entered modern Poland via Slovakia and later entered the balkans via south Poland and another route through Romania

The bulgars entered via Romania ~800AD

The serbs and bulgars mixed with the thracians and the croats and bosnians with illyri/celtic/romani mix

Korbyn
10-07-16, 00:47
The south slavic migration ( ~600AD ) happened after the gothic/barbarian invasion of the roman empire ~400AD . The slavs first entered modern Poland via Slovakia and later entered the balkans via south Poland and another route through Romania

The bulgars entered via Romania ~800AD

The serbs and bulgars mixed with the thracians and the croats and bosnians with illyri/celtic/romani mixThere is a lot of evidence that Western Slavs, as well as Ugrics (Hungarians) and Balts are the result of Sarmatians and other Indo-Iranians. (Scythians) invading and taking those language groups. So, essentially; the Polish and Sorbs carry the highest amount of R1a and lowest amount of I2 Dinarid quite possibly because they are actually Indo-Iranians that speak Slavic.

Nik
10-07-16, 01:41
Just wanted to give my 2 cents after reading several pages on this forum about this topic.

I would suggest everyone interested to focus their attention in the Vlachs of Yugoslavia, Albania, FYROM and Greece and their respective haplogroups.

Studies have shown that several Vlach populated villages in Albania and FYROM show very high I-P37 concentration (sometimes higher than Herzegovina itself), indicating a non-Slavic origin of I-Din in the Balkans.

Similarly, despite the lack of proper studies on ex-Yugoslavian Vlachs, one can turn to history and realize that the area of Northern Montenegro, Herzegovina and Dalmatia were historically heavily populated by ethnic Vlachs (especially the mountainous areas) who only got assimilated into Serbs/Montenegrins, Croats or Bosniaks only after 15-16th century despite the strong Orthodox tradition (or Catholic sometimes).

An interesting proof of these Romance speaking or bilingual communities are the Stecaks (medieval monumental tombstones) made exclusively by Vlachs in the aforementioned regions. In the same time, we known from anthropological studies that these communities were and still are predominantly Dinarid/Dinaric-CM with Atlanto-Med minorities, indicating a pre-Slavic origin of the vast majority of the population despite their modern Slavic tongue.

These facts altogether do not prove they are simply Illyrian, but at least they give us strong hints of a Northern Illyrian/Pannonian/Dacian population been pushed both westward and southward during the Barbarian Invasions.

Korbyn: Its none of my business or anything but I've read yours and Angela's posts and it doesn't seem fair to accuse her of "having an agenda". She's merely stating facts while you're pushing for your personal opinion on the matter, which sorry to say but seems very illogical.

On the contrary, you appear to have the so-called "agenda" by bringing up topics about the Middle Eastern origin of the Albanians on a thread for I-Din. Maybe u should take her advise, do some reading and tone it down a bit. But hey, who am I to tell u?!

Milan
10-07-16, 08:43
Just wanted to give my 2 cents after reading several pages on this forum about this topic.

I would suggest everyone interested to focus their attention in the Vlachs of Yugoslavia, Albania, FYROM and Greece and their respective haplogroups.

Studies have shown that several Vlach populated villages in Albania and FYROM show very high I-P37 concentration (sometimes higher than Herzegovina itself), indicating a non-Slavic origin of I-Din in the Balkans.

Similarly, despite the lack of proper studies on ex-Yugoslavian Vlachs, one can turn to history and realize that the area of Northern Montenegro, Herzegovina and Dalmatia were historically heavily populated by ethnic Vlachs (especially the mountainous areas) who only got assimilated into Serbs/Montenegrins, Croats or Bosniaks only after 15-16th century despite the strong Orthodox tradition (or Catholic sometimes).

An interesting proof of these Romance speaking or bilingual communities are the Stecaks (medieval monumental tombstones) made exclusively by Vlachs in the aforementioned regions. In the same time, we known from anthropological studies that these communities were and still are predominantly Dinarid/Dinaric-CM with Atlanto-Med minorities, indicating a pre-Slavic origin of the vast majority of the population despite their modern Slavic tongue.

These facts altogether do not prove they are simply Illyrian, but at least they give us strong hints of a Northern Illyrian/Pannonian/Dacian population been pushed both westward and southward during the Barbarian Invasions.

Korbyn: Its none of my business or anything but I've read yours and Angela's posts and it doesn't seem fair to accuse her of "having an agenda". She's merely stating facts while you're pushing for your personal opinion on the matter, which sorry to say but seems very illogical.

On the contrary, you appear to have the so-called "agenda" by bringing up topics about the Middle Eastern origin of the Albanians on a thread for I-Din. Maybe u should take her advise, do some reading and tone it down a bit. But hey, who am I to tell u?!
Lol.
Just because I2-Din is found in some groups of Vlachs in perhaps same amount as the South-Slavs we will declare the haplogroup as "Vlach" therefore pre-Slavic,what will you say then about other haplogroups that match between them,then the Romanians that show the same haplogroups as their South-Slavic neighbors.
Extremely inaccurate about the Stecak tombs also about that supposedly "Slavicization" of Vlachs in the 15th and 16 th century lol.
Apart from that i would like to tell you that "Vlach" in medieval Slavic tongue in Balkans meant a cattleman.
I would suggest you and other of this thread not to confuse language groups with haplogroups instead of giving advices to others.
Finally about '"antropology" observation,sorry it is again the South Slavs that mostly have the "Dinaric" appearance,and are tall and well build just like the "previous" population of that area is being described in contrast to others that wanna be "Illyrians".

Korbyn
10-07-16, 08:49
Just wanted to give my 2 cents after reading several pages on this forum about this topic.

I would suggest everyone interested to focus their attention in the Vlachs of Yugoslavia, Albania, FYROM and Greece and their respective haplogroups.

Studies have shown that several Vlach populated villages in Albania and FYROM show very high I-P37 concentration (sometimes higher than Herzegovina itself), indicating a non-Slavic origin of I-Din in the Balkans.

Similarly, despite the lack of proper studies on ex-Yugoslavian Vlachs, one can turn to history and realize that the area of Northern Montenegro, Herzegovina and Dalmatia were historically heavily populated by ethnic Vlachs (especially the mountainous areas) who only got assimilated into Serbs/Montenegrins, Croats or Bosniaks only after 15-16th century despite the strong Orthodox tradition (or Catholic sometimes).

An interesting proof of these Romance speaking or bilingual communities are the Stecaks (medieval monumental tombstones) made exclusively by Vlachs in the aforementioned regions. In the same time, we known from anthropological studies that these communities were and still are predominantly Dinarid/Dinaric-CM with Atlanto-Med minorities, indicating a pre-Slavic origin of the vast majority of the population despite their modern Slavic tongue.

These facts altogether do not prove they are simply Illyrian, but at least they give us strong hints of a Northern Illyrian/Pannonian/Dacian population been pushed both westward and southward during the Barbarian Invasions.

Korbyn: Its none of my business or anything but I've read yours and Angela's posts and it doesn't seem fair to accuse her of "having an agenda". She's merely stating facts while you're pushing for your personal opinion on the matter, which sorry to say but seems very illogical.

On the contrary, you appear to have the so-called "agenda" by bringing up topics about the Middle Eastern origin of the Albanians on a thread for I-Din. Maybe u should take her advise, do some reading and tone it down a bit. But hey, who am I to tell u?!It's not an agenda, it's literal. And there were no facts from her side, only mere interpretations....

Milan
10-07-16, 09:00
[email protected]

Maybe it is not the right thread to discuss that.
I invite you to my last thread about the same issue.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/32270-Four-questions-for-those-who-still-believe-in-prehistoric-Slavs-and-other-fairy-tales

Korbyn
10-07-16, 11:28
Studies have shown that several Vlach populated villages in Albania and FYROM show very high I-P37 concentration (sometimes higher than Herzegovina itself), indicating a non-Slavic origin of I-Din in the Balkans.
Where are the sources for these claims? Sounds rather ludicrous to me. So what now, this only shows that Vlachs are only Romanized Slavs?

Nik
10-07-16, 16:16
Lol.
Just because I2-Din is found in some groups of Vlachs in perhaps same amount as the South-Slavs we will declare the haplogroup as "Vlach" therefore pre-Slavic,what will you say then about other haplogroups that match between them,then the Romanians that show the same haplogroups as their South-Slavic neighbors.
Extremely inaccurate about the Stecak tombs also about that supposedly "Slavicization" of Vlachs in the 15th and 16 th century lol.
They Stecaks were build by dualist believers of South-Slavic origin,Bosnian in this case there is many proofs of that,that case is closed.
Apart from that i would like to tell you that "Vlach" in medieval Slavic tongue in Balkans meant a cattleman.
I would suggest you and other of this thread not to confuse language groups with haplogroups instead of giving advices to others.
Finally about '"antropology" observation,sorry it is again the South Slavs that mostly have the "Dinaric" appearance,and are tall and well build just like the "previous" population of that area is being described in contrast to others that wanna be "Illyrians".

What's with all the LOLs? Are u underage or smth? Just express your opinion and get on with it.

Anyway, the simple idea behind my post that u couldnt understand is that Vlachs are a pre-Slavic Romanized Balkan population, which doesnt make I-Din Vlach like ur logic works by assigning haplogroups to linguistic groups. So dear friend, if Vlachs have it in high amounts, then Illyrians, Dacians and Thracians had it in high amounts too. Is that too difficult to grasp?

These Vlachs that u call cattleman spoke a Romance language to the point that they even influenced the Modern Shtokavian speech due to their previous non-Slavic tongue.

And about the Dinaric "appearance", its highest concentration is in the area of Northern Albania, Western Kosovo, Southern half of Montenegro. The regions north and east of this area have a more mixed type with CM which makes their average height even taller like the case of Northern Montenegro, Herzegovina and Dalmatia. Again, linking a subrace to a certain linguistic group is pure idiocy.

And Korbyn, u r right when u say that I should provide evidence but im not here to educate anybody, so Google the genetic studies on Albania and Vlachs and you will find the original scientific studies on several villages and tables with percentages of each haplogroup. Like I said, I simply gave a suggestion to those interested folks, I wasn't trying to start a war with South Slavic people which are emotionally attached to the topic as their origin is at stake (the nationalists ones i mean, the ones who cant accept their predominantly pre-Slavic origin and similarity with their Albanian southern neighbours due to extreme hatred).

Korbyn
10-07-16, 16:44
Just express your opinion and get on with it. I just can't understand how a Swiss can be this clumsy and ignorant on the matter. The anti-Slavic propaganda must be intense.

Milan
10-07-16, 17:19
I just can't understand how a Swiss can be this clumsy and ignorant on the matter. The anti-Slavic propaganda must be intense.
He is Albanian living in Swiss for sure,just look what he wrote.

Milan
10-07-16, 17:20
deleted.....

Nik
10-07-16, 20:59
Not like my expectations were high, but why did our conversation get personal? Clumsy and ignorant Swiss? Thank you for the feedback but how about u educate me on the matter instead of being offensive?

Korbyn, r u claiming that it is more likely that Slavs migrated massively, replaced 90% of the population (especially in the mountainous areas of the Dinaric Alps), and eventually got Romanized, then after a few centuries got Slavicized back? Because I see no other explanation as to why would Vlachs have a high percentage of I-Din.

Milan, it was actually the Yugoslav scholars that studied the Stecaks and through various contemporary sources identified the ethnicity of the areas with the highest concentration of Stecaks and how Stecaks appeared whenever Vlachs moved to the area. It was again ur own scholars that diged through medieval records and found that these so-called "cattlemen" had still maintained non-Slavic last names despite Orthodoxy, with many Latin and Arbanasi/Albanian last names.

And its again not fair or smart to state that I'm trying to lie when I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it pleases u, analyze it and research on my point and draw a conclusion for yourself. If not, then ignore it and move on. I have no interest whatsoever in arguing with u nor changing ur opinion, especially when it comes to such hot topics for Balkan people's origin where the pride and hatred make up 99% of the barrier together with stupidity. I'm not excluding the Albanian nationalists either just in case, same goes to everyone.

Milan
10-07-16, 21:38
deleted....

Korbyn
10-07-16, 22:01
Not like my expectations were high, but why did our conversation get personal? Clumsy and ignorant Swiss? Thank you for the feedback but how about u educate me on the matter instead of being offensive?

Korbyn, r u claiming that it is more likely that Slavs migrated massively, replaced 90% of the population (especially in the mountainous areas of the Dinaric Alps), and eventually got Romanized, then after a few centuries got Slavicized back? Because I see no other explanation as to why would Vlachs have a high percentage of I-Din.

Milan, it was actually the Yugoslav scholars that studied the Stecaks and through various contemporary sources identified the ethnicity of the areas with the highest concentration of Stecaks and how Stecaks appeared whenever Vlachs moved to the area. It was again ur own scholars that diged through medieval records and found that these so-called "cattlemen" had still maintained non-Slavic last names despite Orthodoxy, with many Latin and Arbanasi/Albanian last names.

And its again not fair or smart to state that I'm trying to lie when I'm simply sharing my opinion. If it pleases u, analyze it and research on my point and draw a conclusion for yourself. If not, then ignore it and move on. I have no interest whatsoever in arguing with u nor changing ur opinion, especially when it comes to such hot topics for Balkan people's origin where the pride and hatred make up 99% of the barrier together with stupidity. I'm not excluding the Albanian nationalists either just in case, same goes to everyone.are you joking. i struggle to understand that you are a real person. its not an insult or being offensive, i don't understand how you think.

Nik
10-07-16, 22:20
I think ur misunderstanding my point because I clearly said that haplogroups are not linked to linguistic groups and I made it obvious that I find that stupid. I am simply using Vlachs as the only numerous non-Slavic population in ex-Yugoslavia as we have no other ethnicities to compare.

I totally get your point by the only thing we r not agreeing is that Vlachs are well documented as a separate ethnic group, not just nomadic mountain shepherds. They have their own language and were distinct from Serbs, just like we clearly see in medieval Serbian, Ragusan, Venetian or Turkish registers. Take the case of Smederevo in Serbia where Vlachs were listed as a separate ethnic group, not as a separate professional group. We don't see in the registers Vlachs (shepherds), Seljaci (Serbs), Blacksmiths, Fishermen, Bandits, Pirates, etc.

All I'm saying is that I believe I-Din was always present in the Balkans, therefore Illyrians had it (especially the Northern tribes), meaning that I don't believe the E-V13, J2b, R1b, R1a, J2a, etc. newcomers exterminated them and cleared out the Dinaric Alps, only to be repopulated again by their Carpathian cousins a few centuries later.

Even I-Din turns out to be indeed only Carpathian, that still doesn't make it Slavic, as there are more suitable candidates like Dacians, Bastarnae, Scythians, etc. who inhabited the area and shared this common haplogroup between them before the Slavs came to finally assimilate them and move them further South and South-West massively.

Nik
10-07-16, 22:23
are you joking. i struggle to understand that you are a real person. its not an insult or being offensive, i don't understand how you think.

Are u going to finally explain urself or u want to be asked/begged several times before u answer. This is not a "Share your feelings" thread, so make ur actual point and spare us your emotional state at this moment.

Milan
10-07-16, 23:13
deleted....

Nik
11-07-16, 00:05
Just to clarify something, are u actually in favour of the theory that Vlachs got their name from the God of cattle in Veles?

Korbyn
11-07-16, 01:05
Can you stop posting? We really need a moderator to supervise more. We need more Moderators.

I don't really mean any offense by this, but I would appreciate it if you would stop talking about this subject. It seems like spam to me and unproductive.

Nik
11-07-16, 01:21
Can you stop posting? We really need a moderator to supervise more. We need more Moderators.

I don't really mean any offense by this, but I would appreciate it if you would stop talking about this subject. It seems like spam to me and unproductive.

I have to completely agree with u on this, as posting on how Vlachs can be a useful link to understanding the genetic makeup of the Balkans before the Slavic invasion is completely off topic and distracting.

We should instead discuss about high quality weed influenced theories of Daco-Thracians being Slavs, while Albanians are a bunch of nomadic horse archers from The Black Sea who skillfully penetrated through the Byzantine Empire unnoticed and in a couple of years subjugated the local Serbian and Greeks by eventually assimilating them into their heavenly superior culture, all these without even being noticed by the Byzantine tax collectors, not to mention higher officials.

Important to note is that the local Greeks and Serbs were so impressed by the new masters that they voluntarily renounced their previous identity, culture and language and became fanatic followers of their new cause.

DuPidh
11-07-16, 02:16
I have to completely agree with u on this, as posting on how Vlachs can be a useful link to understanding the genetic makeup of the Balkans before the Slavic invasion is completely off topic and distracting.

We should instead discuss about high quality weed influenced theories of Daco-Thracians being Slavs, while Albanians are a bunch of nomadic horse archers from The Black Sea who skillfully penetrated through the Byzantine Empire unnoticed and in a couple of years subjugated the local Serbian and Greeks by eventually assimilating them into their heavenly superior culture, all these without even being noticed by the Byzantine tax collectors, not to mention higher officials.

Important to note is that the local Greeks and Serbs were so impressed by the new masters that they voluntarily renounced their previous identity, culture and language and became fanatic followers of their new cause.

One question: When you get home at night, are you able to do it on your own or do you ask other people to direct you there. You don't sound normal!

Angela
11-07-16, 02:26
You guys called for a moderator? Your dreams are fulfilled; you've got one.

The next person to post an insult gets an infraction.

The next person to post something that isn't about I2a Din gets an infraction.

The next person to argue with the moderation gets an infraction.

Every time you do it you get an infraction.

In case you've forgotten, once a certain total is reached, there's an automatic ban.

Are we clear?

Nik
11-07-16, 02:29
One question: When you get home at night, are you able to do it on your own or do you ask other people to direct you there. You don't sound normal!

that's a sarcastic post.

musharraf
26-08-16, 21:22
..........

LeBrok
27-08-16, 02:29
Paleolithic continuityPlease change your flag to Serbian.

lyakh
04-09-16, 11:01
The most interesting for me is not origin of the haplogroup I2a in Balkans per se, but the cause of presence its young branch which has TMRCA estimated as about 2500 years ago. One man has so much descendants in straight male lineage. Young clade of haplogroup I2 occurs in quite large amounts (about 20% of population) in some parts of Ukraine and Belarus. Why?

LeBrok
04-09-16, 19:03
The most interesting for me is not origin of the haplogroup I2a in Balkans per se, but the cause of presence its young branch which has TMRCA estimated as about 2500 years ago. One man has so much descendants in straight male lineage. Young clade of haplogroup I2 occurs in quite large amounts (about 20% of population) in some parts of Ukraine and Belarus. Why? I find it amazing too. Haplogroups rise and fall and some spread like a wildfire even without population replacement. Like a virus. ;) Well, give it couple of thousand of years.
Welcome to Eupedia lyakh.

lyakh
05-09-16, 18:43
Thanks. Expansion of "I2-Din" is amazing. One man who lived about 2500 years ago has many millions of descendants in straight line in Europe, number of them may be above 10 000 000 (contains eight digits). Frequencies of YDNA I2*I2a according to http://www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml in some countries:

- Bosnia-Herzegovina: 55,5%
- Croatia: 37%
- Serbia: 33%
- Montenegro: 29,5%
- Romania: 26%
- Macedonia: 23%
- Moldova: 21%
- Slovenia: 20,5%
- Ukraine: 20,5% (about 4,5 millions men!)
- Bulgaria: 20%
- Belarus: 17,5% (about 800 000 - 900 000 men)
- Hungary: 16%
- Slovakia: 16%
- Albania: 12%
- Russia: 10,5% (about 7 millions men!)
- Greece: 9,5%
- Czech Republic: 9%
- Austria: 7%
- Lithuania: 6%
- Poland: 5,5%
- Kosovo: 2,5%
- Germany: 1,5%

Maybe in just three East Slavic countries together the number of "I2-Din" bearers exceeds ten millions!

Aughex
11-09-16, 04:31
2500 years, thats approx 100 generations so in order for these descendants to propagate they would've needed to be forced out of their territory every once in couple of generations(most likely invasions). Curious that it resembles the Dacian tribes population movement.

Couple of centuries of prosperous development(5-600 BC to 100 AD), at its peak extending in north into present-day Poland borders, in the south to the Roman borders pushing the romans hands(constantly ravaging their provinces south of Danube) and causing retaliation which led the romans to the discovery of the huge stacks of gold in the Carpathians mountains, making the SW region of Dacia a Roman province. This forced some of the Dacian population to flee in the North and East into todays Poland, Ukraine, Belarus and Russia where they were absorbed.

Then in the following centuries massive invasions from huns, goths, etc continued to attack the remaining Dacians from the East and North, meaning that again some of them were forced to flee but this time into west present-day Croatia, Bosnia, Albania, etc where they were absorbed by the local populations. The rest of surviving Dacians that used the mountains as a natural refugee from the invaders, were later assimilated with the Slavs people which continued to migrate in the south into todays Bulgaria, Macedonia, etc.

That one I2a-din ancestor could've been Dacian at origin, be lucky to live in the right time frame with a head-start of 7 centuries of prosperity to expand in a Dacian tribe until they started to crumble into pieces but its descendants were continually forced to migrate to north, east then west and south. Like the rest of the theories on this thread, no way to prove it but its sounds more valid to me than either Slavs or Goths origins that are based on external migratory routes which chronologically arrived to those areas much later.

Thoughts ?

lyakh
15-09-16, 17:08
But why there is so much I2-Din in Belarus and Russia? Theory about Slavic origin of I2-Din (which is only about 2500 years old, but is really popular in many European countries) looks more probable than the theory about Goths.
It is more probable that R1a is the most characteristic haplogroup of Slavs, not I2-Din, which may have non-Slavic origin (such as Dacian, as mentioned in the post above).

slodok
15-10-16, 17:04
I joined just to tell you simple truth.2200 years was looking stupid before years when Ken Nor... was feeding via roots web and now looks totally DUMB! There is no mathematics to explain his desire and mania and much less genetics.His brosnan account with his *calculations" he wipe out totally from the net,but you guys still talk about his pathology.If someone think that 1 person for 5-600 years can create population which can wipe out whole Balkan area ...than you can believe anything but not something with a common sense.Many mutations are random.One is 37.If 37 can happen to Japanese and European non related populations can happen to any one related or not in Europeans.For such a spread which is obvious you need longer time and noticeable cultural impact like cultures of linear ceramic and Cucuteni Tripolie cultures.

Ralphie Boy
30-10-16, 04:42
If the poll was open, I'd vote for the Slavs. I believe that they brought I2 to the Balkans, though I try to leave the door open to other theories (as we learn more). One reason I vote for the Slavs bringing I2 to the Balkans is that it's in low numbers in Italy and Sicily, a place settled by Greeks. I believe that if indeed Greeks contributed haplogroups E and J2 to Italy, and I2 was in the Balkans in pre-Slavic times, we'd see more I2 in Italy. Another reason is that I2 is low in places like Crete and Cyprus.

LeBrok
30-10-16, 07:51
If the poll was open, I'd vote for the Slavs. I believe that they brought I2 to the Balkans, though I try to leave the door open to other theories (as we learn more). One reason I vote for the Slavs bringing I2 to the Balkans is that it's in low numbers in Italy and Sicily, a place settled by Greeks. I believe that if indeed Greeks contributed haplogroups E and J2 to Italy, and I2 was in the Balkans in pre-Slavic times, we'd see more I2 in Italy. Another reason is that I2 is low in places like Crete and Cyprus.It shows open for me.

Ralphie Boy
01-11-16, 02:14
"It shows open for me."

Thanks. I just voted for Slavs in the poll.

IronSide
04-11-16, 01:23
The Slavs because :-

Procopius wrote in 545 that "the Sclaveni and the Antae actually had a single name in the remote past; for they were both called Sporoi in olden times." He described them as barbarians, who lived under democracy, and that they believe in one god, "the maker of lightning" (Perun), to whom they made sacrifice. They lived in scattered housing, and constantly changed settlement. Regarding warfare, they were mainly foot soldiers with small shields and javelins, lightly clothed, some entering battle naked with only their genitals covered. Their language is "barbarous" (that is, not Greek-speaking), and the two tribes do not differ in appearance, being tall and robust, "while their bodies and hair are neither very fair or blond, nor indeed do they incline entirely to the dark type, but they are all slightly ruddy in color. And they live a hard life, giving no heed to bodily comforts..."


This is a description of the early Slavs, no disrespect to R1a people, but these traits of are associated with i2a-din majority populations, what do you think ?

gyms
15-11-16, 09:22
This is a description of the early Slavs, no disrespect to R1a people, but these traits of are associated with i2a-din majority populations, what do you think ?

Haplogroups has nothing to do with traits.

IronSide
02-12-16, 21:50
This is a description of the early Slavs, no disrespect to R1a people, but these traits of are associated with i2a-din majority populations, what do you think ?

Haplogroups has nothing to do with traits.

In countries like Turkey or Greece where many paternal and maternal haplogroups exist that could be true, however if a haplogroup exists in large numbers in a population where it amounts to 60% or more then it must contribute to physical features.

Physical traits of a population is the sum of all traits of maternal and paternal haplogroups multiplied by their frequency, the lesser the diversity or higher frequency of one group will result in that group making the most recognizable output.

Just look at southern and northern Italy, or southern slavic countries and Poland. I dont know but I observe blonde hair to be associated with R1a majority populations for example, not always but observable, the Indo Aryans before they invaded India most likely had fair features that are still present in Afghanistan and some from the higher castes of Hinduism.

in answering the question of how I2a-Din got to the balkans I favoured the slavic expansions because of the quote I mentioned, if you were to suppose paleolithic continuity then R1a subclades were the only ones that migrated to the balkans, surely procopuis would have discribed them as fair at least.

I hope i'm not seeing paterns where non exist.

gyms
03-12-16, 06:14
Dominant and Recessive Genes In Humans

http://www.sciencebrainwaves.com/dominant-and-recessive-genes-in-humans/ (http://www.sciencebrainwaves.com/dominant-and-recessive-genes-in-humans/)

Human Traits: autosomal

http://faculty.southwest.tn.edu/jiwilliams/human_traits.htm


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetics
Inheritance of traits for humans are based upon Gregor Mendel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel)'s model of inheritance. Mendel deduced that inheritance depends upon discrete units of inheritance, called factors or genes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mendelian_traits_in_humans

http://www.ck12.org/user:dGVycnlyQHZhbGxleTI2Mi5vcmc./section/Human-Inheritance-%253A%253Aof%253A%253A-Human-Genetics-and-Biotechnology/

tiami
28-12-16, 19:14
But why there is so much I2-Din in Belarus and Russia? Theory about Slavic origin of I2-Din (which is only about 2500 years old, but is really popular in many European countries) looks more probable than the theory about Goths.
It is more probable that R1a is the most characteristic haplogroup of Slavs, not I2-Din, which may have non-Slavic origin (such as Dacian, as mentioned in the post above).

Slavs are ethnogenesis of I and R1a people who lived side by side as neighbours and brothers for long long time. way before Dacians and Thracians who are their descendents. simple as that. there were no migration of I2 people no metter what you have read in history books because Slavic culture predates all written history. especially I hpg is very interesting as it is the only old native european hpg left and very very old. the history should have to be rewritten if we accepted the truth about Slavic ethnogenesis and it's influnece on ancient and modern european history and culture.

Cip
14-01-17, 20:15
Dacians were also called Getae, they predate slavs in Balkans. Let look at a map of the Dacian (Getae) in Asia
8375
See the Massagetae in south Kazahstan. If Massagetae are descendents of the Getae (Dacians) form Balkans, and if I2a-Din was a Dacian haplogroup we expect to see Hg I there. ok, let see this map:
8376
It looks like there is a poket of Hg I exactly in the teritory of Massagetae, that means they cary it from their original homeland Dacia. That implies it was in Balkans way befor slavs.
Maybe i'll make it clearer in net picture:
8377
I dont't say that slavs in their migration didn't pick up some Dacian I2a, but in East Europe origin of I2a-din IS NOT SLAVIC.
I also believe Thracians and Dacians were closely related, but I2a wasn't thracian either. See the map made by bulgarians that separated thracian citys from the dacaians by their name:
8378
Now let see a pattern:
8379
Vlachs and Romanians are the direct descendents of Dacians that were romanised. Slavs only pick up the Hg and spread it at some extent.

DuPidh
22-01-17, 23:29
Thats a possibility.
But you d mean slavic linguistically and not purely genetically. correct?

I looked at your theory and eliminated the y-dna of the "slavs" and looked at northern croatia, slovenia and pannonian areas and was left with this
R1b (U-106 ) = 15% to 23% .........could be from the austrians or a celtic branch
I1 = 9% to 10% ..............Old german marker
E1b1b = 3%
J2 = 3%
G2a = 3%
I2b = 2%
J1 = 1%

Total = less than 50 % ..........remainder was R1a1a at 37% , remainder was I2a-din

So, to conclude , it seems doubtful that I2a-din was brought to the balkans by the slavs ( unless R1a1a is not purely slavic and this was illyrian )

Its obvious that I2a is not Illyrian. North Albania, Kosovo, is only 3% I2a din. North Albania+Kosovo+Macedonian Albanians are 2/3 of present Albanian population and score low in I2a1. South Albania being under Bullgarian empire for 120 years is about 12% I2a. Clear indication of Bulgarian infusion.

Milan.M
23-01-17, 00:00
The haplogroup reaches its maximum frequency in the Dinaric Alps in Bosnia, where the men are on record as being the tallest in the world, with a male average height of 185.6 cm (6 ft 1.1 in).The same can be said about their northern "brothers" where I1 dominate,much like the very tall Illyrian Greeks described.
:D

So far the best candidate for this haplogroup is Cucuteni-Trypillian culture from where it spread more further.Only if we does genetic tests we can know this.

IronSide
23-01-17, 21:46
Illyrians or Dacians or Slavs or any other theory should in my opinion attempt to explain its recent TMRCA which is between 2600 <---> 1950 years ago with a 95% accuracy according to https://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/, any historic peoples before this time frame are excluded.

Milan.M
23-01-17, 21:50
Illyrians or Dacians or Slavs or any other theory should in my opinion attempt to explain its recent TMRCA which is between 2600 <---> 1950 years ago with a 95% accuracy according to https://www.yfull.com/tree/I2/, any historic peoples before this time frame are excluded.
And who estimated this TMRCA,who is him,is he reliable? Send a scientific paper claiming that,can you?send a scientific paper that this haplogroup wasn't on the Balkans 2600 <---> 1950 years ago and is agreed among scholars? as for people like Ken Nordvedt or similar branch like Klyosov if we take to literate everything they say,then.... we can go in another field.

gyms
23-01-17, 23:26
"send a scientific paper that this haplogroup wasn't on the Balkans 2600 <---> 1950 years ago"

Send a scientific paper that this haplogroup was on the Balkans 2600-1950 years ago!

IronSide
24-01-17, 01:37
Ok guys calm down I don't know much about TMRCA calculations but there is no reason to reject them entirely !! I mean when these calculations agree with our theories we accept them but when they don't we reject them and that's not reasonable.

You can be skeptical about TMRCA but what about the fact that we found individuals that are negative for L147.2 (dinaric) but not it's immediate ancestor in eastern Poland, Belarus, and western Ukraine. This area has been inhabited by the Slavs since before their historic migrations, two different lines of evidence now point to a Slavic origin.

by the way has there been any Y-dna tests done on the sorbs in Germany ? in the I2a1 map there is a concentration in east Germany in their area so I thought that was them but couldn't find anything online, if they indeed turn out to have a high amount of I2-Din then that would be a third line of evidence as there is no reason a Slavic group cut off from the rest of the Slavs would have I2-Din if it weren't Slavic.

DNZ
24-01-17, 02:32
You were on the road of the Steppe peoples from the ancient times.Alans,Sarmatians,Scyhtians.You invaded by Huns,Goths,Avars,Slavs,Bulgars,Magyars,Pechenegs,C umans,Turks,Tatars.How can you be a direct descendants of Dacians?All We are sharing similar components.The other way to talk is not a scientific.

Milan.M
24-01-17, 10:23
[email protected]
I never associated certain haplogroup with historical population,my reply above was irony to dupidh because he concluded that haplogroups that are carried by modern day Albanians must be or are Illyrian,even though the very term is vague and is historical issue,the same go with Dacian thing,everything you posted is claimed by some internet "charlatans" which that is not even their profession.Even if you go on wikipedia which does not follow this you will read much different things about this particular haplogroup,researching that was done back then by academics however nothing conclusive,there was some new papers about Slavic population generaly which if im not mistaken was sended to you by the user Markoz on your thread.
About Balkan population generaly we need samples from bronze/iron age,antiquity,middle ages so we can really conclude some things,which haplogroup were present and to what degree.
So far we do not have that much collection of genetics to conclude anything.

gyms
24-01-17, 12:30
You were on the road of the Steppe peoples from the ancient times.Alans,Sarmatians,Scyhtians.You invaded by Huns,Goths,Avars,Slavs,Bulgars,Magyars,Pechenegs,C umans,Turks,Tatars.How can you be a direct descendants of Dacians?This is just your feelings.All We are sharing same components.The other way to talk is not a scientific.

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33054-Genetic-structure-of-the-early-Hungarian-conquerors-inferred-from-mtDNA-and-Y-DNA

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00438-016-1267-z

Sample 12 is I2a1b3a>S17250.
Probability 63,42
Fitness 48,81

mtDNA: A12

Sample 17 is I2a1b3a>4460>4318
Probability 87,52
Fitness 29,66

mtDNA: H6a1a

Two of four samples are I2a-"Din"(50%).

DNZ
24-01-17, 15:28
Thanks for your informational answer.I know Magyars and Onogurs histories are very well.I interested in them.But Dna and admixtures are more complicated for me.That's exactly my point,Nothing can't be the same.Today,These historical events influences are so much for the local populations.

trdbr1234
25-01-17, 02:30
Lol.
Just because I2-Din is found in some groups of Vlachs in perhaps same amount as the South-Slavs we will declare the haplogroup as "Vlach" therefore pre-Slavic,what will you say then about other haplogroups that match between them,then the Romanians that show the same haplogroups as their South-Slavic neighbors.
Extremely inaccurate about the Stecak tombs also about that supposedly "Slavicization" of Vlachs in the 15th and 16 th century lol.
Apart from that i would like to tell you that "Vlach" in medieval Slavic tongue in Balkans meant a cattleman.
I would suggest you and other of this thread not to confuse language groups with haplogroups instead of giving advices to others.
Finally about '"antropology" observation,sorry it is again the South Slavs that mostly have the "Dinaric" appearance,and are tall and well build just like the "previous" population of that area is being described in contrast to others that wanna be "Illyrians". I would just like to add that in in Albania we call Vlach, Vlah or Vleh, which in Albanian means Brother. This is in relation to "southern vlachs" which are fairly similar to us and of-course Greece. This name may have spread to all Latin speakers in the Balkans.

tiami
26-01-17, 19:53
slav is nothing else than christian name for people who inhabited same territory for far longer than lying history books and 'science' exist. simple as that. there are two things history and science hate the most: eastern roman empire and slavic language.

Miroslav
02-03-17, 21:50
The current information, provided by Maciamo, about Haplogroup I2a1b (M423) lacks previous connection with Illyrians and currently considers it's expansion to the Balkan to have occured only with Slavic migration. There several issues with this consideration:

1) It's solely based on contemporary frequency in East European populations.

2) It's no based on critical and empirical approach as there are not enough evidence from Middle Age, Ancient and older sources from both East and Southeast Europe.

3) The conclusion is a simple ideological construction which ignores the possibility the haplgroup was widespread in both East and Southeast Europe, as well ignores the recent archeological research which concluded that there was no mass migration of Slavs, the Balkan i.e. Yugoslavian territory was not „uninhabited“ like previously ideologically considered by the historians, which emerged from 19th century romantic-idealistic historiography, and especially that the Croats and Serbs were only small tribes (neither migrated from western Ukraine), i.e. the population ethogenesis didn't change drastically, but the political and cultural/ethnical identity changed, in a similar way like during the Roman Empire when the indigenous population was Romanized, while after the fall of WRE and consolidation of Slavic policy the indigenous population was Slavicized through the centuries.

For example I will give another chronology in which will show that the age, both formation and TMRCA, do not correspond with the Slavic expansion i.e. migration to the Balkan at all. According to Yfull Ytree v5.02 (YBP calculated from 1950):

--- I-M423 (18,006 YBP): peak of LGM 18,000 YBP
---- I-Y3104 (13,655 YBP)
----- I-L621 (11,311 YBP): beginning of interglacial Holocene
------ I-CTS4002 (6,250 YBP): it corresponds to both early Cucuteni-Trypillian kulture in Romania-Ukraine, as well early Hvar-Lisičići culture in Dalmatia, and the end of Vinča culture.
------- I-CTS10228 (5,062 YBP): partial end of Cucuteni-Trypillian culure, end of Hvar-Lisičići culture, Indo-European expansion (R1a, R1b) in Europe
-------- I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE): see below
--------- TMRCA of I-S17250 is 1,731 YBP (219 CE) according to formation age of subclades I-Y4882 (1,993 YBP), I-Y5596 (1,972 YBP), I-Y30729 (2,346 YBP), I-PH908 (1,802 YBP) and many other individual sub-mutations, with personal speculation that to the I-Y5596 or I-PG908 subclades possibly belong most I2a-Dinaric in the Balkan.
---------- The I-Y5596 has TMRCA 1,658 YBP (292 CE) i.e it mostly branches into I-Z16971 (1,886 YBP: 64 CE), which TMRCA 1,478 YBP (472 CE) which drastically varies mostly between I-A815 (1,658 YBP) and I-Y12911 (917 YBP) i.e. 292-1033 CE, while the sample ID of other two alone branch ID is 1,924 YBP and 1,416 YBP i.e. 26-534 CE.
---------- The I-PG908 (in its own „info“ has TMRCA 1,879 YBP: 71 CE) branches into I-Z16983 (1,715 YBP: 235 CE), which TMRCA of 1,321 YBP, due to small number of branch ID, is calculated with I-Y4789 (1,633 YBP) with 7 sample ID and only 1 sample of YF07968 from 1,010 YBP which gives disproportionate 1,321 YBP, thus will only consider age of I-Y4789 which further branches. Its TMRCA is 1,618 YBP (332 CE), calculated with limited 7 samples which form a formula (2,192 YBP+1,282 YBP+1,177 YBP+1821 YBP)/4.

In short, if the formation age and TMRCA are compared to historical events, like formation or migration of specific ethnical/cultural identity, then it empirically can not be used as a support i.e it absolutely no way indicates a correlation with Slavic expansion in Eastern Europe, more specifically, migration from Eeastern Europe toward Balkan between 550-750 CE.

Not only that, even the ethnogenesis origin of Slavic people, quote: „According to Polish historian Gerard Labuda, the ethnogenesis of Slavic people is the Trzciniec culture[37] from about 1700 to 1200 BC. The Milograd culture hypothesis posits that the pre-Proto-Slavs (or Balto-Slavs) originated in the seventh century BC–first century AD culture of northern Ukraine and southern Belarus. According to the Chernoles culture theory, the pre-Proto-Slavs originated in the 1025–700 BC culture of northern Ukraine and the third century BC–first century AD Zarubintsy culture. According to the Lusatian culture hypothesis, they were present in north-eastern Central Europe in the 1300–500 BC culture and the second century BC–fourth century AD Przeworsk culture“ does not correlate anyhow with the formation age and TMRCA of older subclades I-CTS10228 and I-S17250.

It can be theorized that the formation of I2a-Dinaric i.e. I-CTS10228 (3,112 BCE) was caused by some climate or social-historical events which caused the expansion, for example of the population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian and other cultures, and their change of lifestyle from mostly sedentary to nomadic or vice versa, and were assimilated by the Indo-Europeans (R1a and R1b).

However, the problem with the migration theory, according to which the populations with I2a-Dinaric originally lived in Carphatian Mountains and near Vistula River, which were slavicized making the Proto-Slavs with R1a in that area and only after then migrated to the south, is in the fact that between I-CTS10228 and I-S17250 is a time difference in formation of incredible 2,731 years or at least 136-109 generations. It indicates an extreme isolation and social-historical events which did not support the formation of new subclades, while in Europe at the time was period of Bronze Age and Iron Age. It is impossible that in such active and developing social-historical events in Western, Central and Eastern Europe, there was no mutation for almost 3,000 years in population who was allegedly located in Central-Eastern Europe. Such an extreme isolation at the time could have only happen in Southeast Europe i.e Dinaric Alps and Balkan mountains.

This difference in 2,731 years could be explained by autochthonous theory i.e. multidisciplinary by archeological research. According to Alojz Benac, who analyzed archeological and ethno-cultural elements on Western Balkan (mostly area of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Western Serbia, Kosovo, part of Dalmatia and Albania), and A. Stipčević (1991), gave the most plausible and best formulated theory on the origin of Illyrians. According to Benac there exist four stages of development in Illyrian tribal communities:

1) „Pre-Illyrians“ are basic substrate which emerged along other groups in the end of Neolithic (Baden, Kostolac, Vučedol, culture with ribbon ceramics and Bell Beaker did not serve as a substrate yet as an additional element, and their disappearance is linked to the movement of the Indo-Europeans from the east). According to Benac, the research in 1970s during this period recorded a duration of Neolithic retardation throughout the Chalcolithic or Copper Age, in which the primary role played the Hvar-Lisičići (note Brač, Korčula and Hvar 54-67%, Herzegovina c. 70% I2a-Dinaric) and the Adriatic variant of the Vučedol culture.

2) „Proto-Illyrians“ developed in the period of Indo-Europeans expansion, and in the end of Neolithic on Balkan occured „Illyrization“. According to research of the settlements and culture there was no immigration in the Bronze Age, so in the location of Glasinac can be seen uninterrupted development of culture from Bronze to Iron Age.

3) „Early-Illyrians“ developed in the end of Bronze Age at the time of so-called Dorian migration c. 1,200 BCE, and spread of Urnfield culture, which did not significantly affect the stability on the narrow part of Western Balkan or Illyrian ethnogenesis.
4) „Illyrians“ developed in the Iron Age.

According to Benac, like other archeologists, there's clear difference and existence of sub-groups among Illyrians i.e. generally one narrow area between river Aoös/Vjosë and Mat in Albania (note high E1b1b), and one wide area along the Adriatic coast and its hinterland (note high I2a-Dinaric). While in the narrow area the main role had Neolithic and Eneolithic (Copper) cultures type Maliq, elements of Baden and Kostolac, some from Epir-Macedonia, and Vučedol-Corded Ware; in the wide area is distinctively backward Hvar-Lisičići component (later substrate and part of Illyrian tribes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, e.g. Dassareti and Autariatae) and late Vučedol culture group (Ljubljansko Barje type).

The sudden formation of I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE) directly corresponds to the Celtic invasion/settlement of Southeastern Europe in the 4th century BCE and political degradation of the many Illyrian tribes in the hinterland, including the „the once greatest and most powerful Illyrian people“ (Strabo) tribe of Autariatae (between river Bosnia and Drina), Ardiaei (between Neretva and Albania), Dardani and so on.

Strabo, Book VII, Chapter 5: "for those who were most powerful in earlier times were utterly humbled or were obliterated, as, for example, among the Galatae the Boii and the Scordistae, and among the Illyrians the Autariatae, Ardiaei, and Dardanii, and among the Thracians the Triballi; that is, they were reduced in warfare by one another at first and then later by the Macedonians and the Romans... Now the Autariatae were once the largest and best tribe of the Illyrians. In earlier times they were continually at war with the Ardiaei over the salt-works on the common frontiers... At one time when the Autariatae had subdued the Triballi, whose territory extended from that of the Agrianes as far as the Ister, a journey of fifteen days, they held sway also over the rest of the Thracians and the Illyrians; but they were overpowered, at first by the Scordisci, and later on by the Romans, who also subdued the Scordisci themselves, after these had been in power for a long time".

At the time many tribes fought against the Macedonians, while later Roman-Illyrian wars from 3rd century BCE were only the start of end. Thing which is indicative, is that in the same period (4th century BCE) is dated the first historical, at least constant, mention of the Illyrians, and that their tribes are losing political influence due to mutual (due to various reasons) wars and better organized and developed Celts.

Those same Illyrians did not vanish in the literal sense of the Ancient chronicles, yet their ethno-political influence vanished and as such is of no interest to foreign historians or policies. After the Macedonian and Celtic events, the Roman used the situation to expand and succeeded. The Illyrians culture and hillforts are destroyed or arrogate, and they're Romanized (in the wide area, not in narrow Albania) from which emerged a mass population later known as semi-romanized Vlachs.

The TMRCA of I-S17250 (219 CE) i.e. its subclades between 332-472 CE could indicate: Constitutio Antoniniana granted citizenship in 212 CE to all free Roman Empire men, later Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 CE); invasion of the Goths and Huns which caused many social distortions and migrations, and as result end of the Roman Empire in 476 CE. There is no need that I-S17250 was located only north of Danube because these events/migrations could have influencedpopulations on both side of the Danube border. However, they do not indicate later 550-750 migration of the Slavs.

The issue with the I2a-Dinaric Slavic migration theory are, beside these age differences which do not correlate with Slavic migration, archeological research which showed that there was no mass migration nor Balkan was uninhabited, rather can be followed continuity of cultural sources between Ancient and Middle Ages. With this agree historians whether about history or identity of Illyrians and Croats (i.e. Slavs) in the Balkan (D. Džino and F. Curta), as well genetic research which are in correlation "Father Tongue hypothesis" i.e. Mother Tongue and Y Chromosomes (Science, 2011): "focusing on prehistoric language shift in already settled areas, examples worldwide show that as little as 10-20% of prehistoric male immigration can (but need not) cause a language switch, indicating an elite imposition such as may have happened with the appearance of the first farmers or metalworkers in the neolithic, bronze and iron ages", with the fact the recent "Croatian national reference Y-STR haplotype databse" (2012) with 1,100 Y-DNA samples divided in five regions of Croatia showed in eastern, southern and western 18.64-20.00%, while in central and northern 23.64-29.09% of R1a; while according to Eupedia, percentage in BiH is 15%, Serbia 16%, Bulgaria 17%, Macedonia 13.5%, and Montenegro 7.5%, which arrived with the Slavs in Middle Age (2016 research consideration). The I2a showed exactly the opposite regional percentage in Croatia, from northern and central 25.45-31.82%, western and eastern 36.82-40.00%, southern 54.55%.

mihaitzateo
05-03-17, 18:13
Well,after what Maciamo have researched this HG originated in Switzerland,12500 years ago.
This makes very clear that I2-din is NOT related to Slavic expansion.
Since is found in Switzerland,cannot either be related to Celtic migrations,since Celts came from East .
So Paleolithic continuity I think is most plausible hypothesis.

srdceleva
06-03-17, 02:02
There could have been a northern and southern Slavic group at the time of the ethnogenesis of the Slavic peoples, some what similar to the development of the Indo-Europeans in the steppes. Ukraine shows quite high rates of I2a and diversity there. I wouldn't be surprised if historically there was a Slavic core in the area that stretched further south. When Germanic tribes spread west and left central Europe open it might have caused(most certainly did ) a massive migration in all directions from both northern and southern groups , one where the northern group spread west and south west and were the southern one spread mainly south and also south west. I know linguistics isn't indicative of genetic origin always but many times it is correlated.

gyms
09-05-17, 10:50
"There could have been a northern and southern Slavic group at the time of the ethnogenesis of the Slavic peoples, some what similar to the development of the Indo-Europeans in the steppes."

The making of the Slavs: Slavic ethnogenesis revisited
http://www.academia.edu/422133/The_making_of_the_Slavs_Slavic_ethnogenesis_revisi ted

slodok
30-05-17, 18:09
First there was movement to Ukraine from Balkan in Russian Turkish war,in creation of Romania in Wlach revolution and economic migration to east under Ottoman so there is recent influx.In reality for Balkan Din is actually corresponding to Dinaric modal haplotype from Pericic paper some 10 years ago.After the paper Ken Northvead go crazy on Roots web developing new calculus with only one reason to send Dinaric to the north out of Balkan.Ken for this work has received from Clinton medal.And most of his work has gone as his bresnan web.He brags openly for his political activity and you guys believe him.Population genetics is not a science because of politics.Any geneticist who worked on these research know by comparative study that Din in Balkan correspond to Dinaric anthropological type well know in anthropology.Even variation in Din can be identified.Only by this anyone of anthropologist can predict haplogroup.Now we can easy see results from anthropological finds in necropolis/burials from different periods to see presence of dinaric anthropology and its variation.Anthropology is science and we know that Dinaric type is dominant in second and first millennium before Christ in Balkan area.If Din has come with Slav migration we can expect in time of 6 to 10 century AD rise in Dinaric type.BUT result actually shows FALL.What is up is Leptodolohomorphic type with dolihocrany known like Slavic type which is haplogroup R east.From 17 to 19 century this type R from 20-30% fall to 10-15% and it is simple why,..genetic drift in Balkan.Hopefully some day will be done arrcheogenetic testing on dinaric skeletons from 2 and 1 millenium bc and all will be known again...

slodok
30-05-17, 18:12
Great points ...in all nonsense
The current information, provided by Maciamo, about Haplogroup I2a1b (M423) lacks previous connection with Illyrians and currently considers it's expansion to the Balkan to have occured only with Slavic migration. There several issues with this consideration:

1) It's solely based on contemporary frequency in East European populations.

2) It's no based on critical and empirical approach as there are not enough evidence from Middle Age, Ancient and older sources from both East and Southeast Europe.

3) The conclusion is a simple ideological construction which ignores the possibility the haplgroup was widespread in both East and Southeast Europe, as well ignores the recent archeological research which concluded that there was no mass migration of Slavs, the Balkan i.e. Yugoslavian territory was not „uninhabited“ like previously ideologically considered by the historians, which emerged from 19th century romantic-idealistic historiography, and especially that the Croats and Serbs were only small tribes (neither migrated from western Ukraine), i.e. the population ethogenesis didn't change drastically, but the political and cultural/ethnical identity changed, in a similar way like during the Roman Empire when the indigenous population was Romanized, while after the fall of WRE and consolidation of Slavic policy the indigenous population was Slavicized through the centuries.

For example I will give another chronology in which will show that the age, both formation and TMRCA, do not correspond with the Slavic expansion i.e. migration to the Balkan at all. According to Yfull Ytree v5.02 (YBP calculated from 1950):

--- I-M423 (18,006 YBP): peak of LGM 18,000 YBP
---- I-Y3104 (13,655 YBP)
----- I-L621 (11,311 YBP): beginning of interglacial Holocene
------ I-CTS4002 (6,250 YBP): it corresponds to both early Cucuteni-Trypillian kulture in Romania-Ukraine, as well early Hvar-Lisičići culture in Dalmatia, and the end of Vinča culture.
------- I-CTS10228 (5,062 YBP): partial end of Cucuteni-Trypillian culure, end of Hvar-Lisičići culture, Indo-European expansion (R1a, R1b) in Europe
-------- I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE): see below
--------- TMRCA of I-S17250 is 1,731 YBP (219 CE) according to formation age of subclades I-Y4882 (1,993 YBP), I-Y5596 (1,972 YBP), I-Y30729 (2,346 YBP), I-PH908 (1,802 YBP) and many other individual sub-mutations, with personal speculation that to the I-Y5596 or I-PG908 subclades possibly belong most I2a-Dinaric in the Balkan.
---------- The I-Y5596 has TMRCA 1,658 YBP (292 CE) i.e it mostly branches into I-Z16971 (1,886 YBP: 64 CE), which TMRCA 1,478 YBP (472 CE) which drastically varies mostly between I-A815 (1,658 YBP) and I-Y12911 (917 YBP) i.e. 292-1033 CE, while the sample ID of other two alone branch ID is 1,924 YBP and 1,416 YBP i.e. 26-534 CE.
---------- The I-PG908 (in its own „info“ has TMRCA 1,879 YBP: 71 CE) branches into I-Z16983 (1,715 YBP: 235 CE), which TMRCA of 1,321 YBP, due to small number of branch ID, is calculated with I-Y4789 (1,633 YBP) with 7 sample ID and only 1 sample of YF07968 from 1,010 YBP which gives disproportionate 1,321 YBP, thus will only consider age of I-Y4789 which further branches. Its TMRCA is 1,618 YBP (332 CE), calculated with limited 7 samples which form a formula (2,192 YBP+1,282 YBP+1,177 YBP+1821 YBP)/4.

In short, if the formation age and TMRCA are compared to historical events, like formation or migration of specific ethnical/cultural identity, then it empirically can not be used as a support i.e it absolutely no way indicates a correlation with Slavic expansion in Eastern Europe, more specifically, migration from Eeastern Europe toward Balkan between 550-750 CE.

Not only that, even the ethnogenesis origin of Slavic people, quote: „According to Polish historian Gerard Labuda, the ethnogenesis of Slavic people is the Trzciniec culture[37] from about 1700 to 1200 BC. The Milograd culture hypothesis posits that the pre-Proto-Slavs (or Balto-Slavs) originated in the seventh century BC–first century AD culture of northern Ukraine and southern Belarus. According to the Chernoles culture theory, the pre-Proto-Slavs originated in the 1025–700 BC culture of northern Ukraine and the third century BC–first century AD Zarubintsy culture. According to the Lusatian culture hypothesis, they were present in north-eastern Central Europe in the 1300–500 BC culture and the second century BC–fourth century AD Przeworsk culture“ does not correlate anyhow with the formation age and TMRCA of older subclades I-CTS10228 and I-S17250.

It can be theorized that the formation of I2a-Dinaric i.e. I-CTS10228 (3,112 BCE) was caused by some climate or social-historical events which caused the expansion, for example of the population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian and other cultures, and their change of lifestyle from mostly sedentary to nomadic or vice versa, and were assimilated by the Indo-Europeans (R1a and R1b).

However, the problem with the migration theory, according to which the populations with I2a-Dinaric originally lived in Carphatian Mountains and near Vistula River, which were slavicized making the Proto-Slavs with R1a in that area and only after then migrated to the south, is in the fact that between I-CTS10228 and I-S17250 is a time difference in formation of incredible 2,731 years or at least 136-109 generations. It indicates an extreme isolation and social-historical events which did not support the formation of new subclades, while in Europe at the time was period of Bronze Age and Iron Age. It is impossible that in such active and developing social-historical events in Western, Central and Eastern Europe, there was no mutation for almost 3,000 years in population who was allegedly located in Central-Eastern Europe. Such an extreme isolation at the time could have only happen in Southeast Europe i.e Dinaric Alps and Balkan mountains.

This difference in 2,731 years could be explained by autochthonous theory i.e. multidisciplinary by archeological research. According to Alojz Benac, who analyzed archeological and ethno-cultural elements on Western Balkan (mostly area of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Western Serbia, Kosovo, part of Dalmatia and Albania), and A. Stipčević (1991), gave the most plausible and best formulated theory on the origin of Illyrians. According to Benac there exist four stages of development in Illyrian tribal communities:

1) „Pre-Illyrians“ are basic substrate which emerged along other groups in the end of Neolithic (Baden, Kostolac, Vučedol, culture with ribbon ceramics and Bell Beaker did not serve as a substrate yet as an additional element, and their disappearance is linked to the movement of the Indo-Europeans from the east). According to Benac, the research in 1970s during this period recorded a duration of Neolithic retardation throughout the Chalcolithic or Copper Age, in which the primary role played the Hvar-Lisičići (note Brač, Korčula and Hvar 54-67%, Herzegovina c. 70% I2a-Dinaric) and the Adriatic variant of the Vučedol culture.

2) „Proto-Illyrians“ developed in the period of Indo-Europeans expansion, and in the end of Neolithic on Balkan occured „Illyrization“. According to research of the settlements and culture there was no immigration in the Bronze Age, so in the location of Glasinac can be seen uninterrupted development of culture from Bronze to Iron Age.

3) „Early-Illyrians“ developed in the end of Bronze Age at the time of so-called Dorian migration c. 1,200 BCE, and spread of Urnfield culture, which did not significantly affect the stability on the narrow part of Western Balkan or Illyrian ethnogenesis.
4) „Illyrians“ developed in the Iron Age.

According to Benac, like other archeologists, there's clear difference and existence of sub-groups among Illyrians i.e. generally one narrow area between river Aoös/Vjosë and Mat in Albania (note high E1b1b), and one wide area along the Adriatic coast and its hinterland (note high I2a-Dinaric). While in the narrow area the main role had Neolithic and Eneolithic (Copper) cultures type Maliq, elements of Baden and Kostolac, some from Epir-Macedonia, and Vučedol-Corded Ware; in the wide area is distinctively backward Hvar-Lisičići component (later substrate and part of Illyrian tribes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, e.g. Dassareti and Autariatae) and late Vučedol culture group (Ljubljansko Barje type).

The sudden formation of I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE) directly corresponds to the Celtic invasion/settlement of Southeastern Europe in the 4th century BCE and political degradation of the many Illyrian tribes in the hinterland, including the „the once greatest and most powerful Illyrian people“ (Strabo) tribe of Autariatae (between river Bosnia and Drina), Ardiaei (between Neretva and Albania), Dardani and so on.

Strabo, Book VII, Chapter 5: "for those who were most powerful in earlier times were utterly humbled or were obliterated, as, for example, among the Galatae the Boii and the Scordistae, and among the Illyrians the Autariatae, Ardiaei, and Dardanii, and among the Thracians the Triballi; that is, they were reduced in warfare by one another at first and then later by the Macedonians and the Romans... Now the Autariatae were once the largest and best tribe of the Illyrians. In earlier times they were continually at war with the Ardiaei over the salt-works on the common frontiers... At one time when the Autariatae had subdued the Triballi, whose territory extended from that of the Agrianes as far as the Ister, a journey of fifteen days, they held sway also over the rest of the Thracians and the Illyrians; but they were overpowered, at first by the Scordisci, and later on by the Romans, who also subdued the Scordisci themselves, after these had been in power for a long time".

At the time many tribes fought against the Macedonians, while later Roman-Illyrian wars from 3rd century BCE were only the start of end. Thing which is indicative, is that in the same period (4th century BCE) is dated the first historical, at least constant, mention of the Illyrians, and that their tribes are losing political influence due to mutual (due to various reasons) wars and better organized and developed Celts.

Those same Illyrians did not vanish in the literal sense of the Ancient chronicles, yet their ethno-political influence vanished and as such is of no interest to foreign historians or policies. After the Macedonian and Celtic events, the Roman used the situation to expand and succeeded. The Illyrians culture and hillforts are destroyed or arrogate, and they're Romanized (in the wide area, not in narrow Albania) from which emerged a mass population later known as semi-romanized Vlachs.

The TMRCA of I-S17250 (219 CE) i.e. its subclades between 332-472 CE could indicate: Constitutio Antoniniana granted citizenship in 212 CE to all free Roman Empire men, later Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 CE); invasion of the Goths and Huns which caused many social distortions and migrations, and as result end of the Roman Empire in 476 CE. There is no need that I-S17250 was located only north of Danube because these events/migrations could have influencedpopulations on both side of the Danube border. However, they do not indicate later 550-750 migration of the Slavs.

The issue with the I2a-Dinaric Slavic migration theory are, beside these age differences which do not correlate with Slavic migration, archeological research which showed that there was no mass migration nor Balkan was uninhabited, rather can be followed continuity of cultural sources between Ancient and Middle Ages. With this agree historians whether about history or identity of Illyrians and Croats (i.e. Slavs) in the Balkan (D. Džino and F. Curta), as well genetic research which are in correlation "Father Tongue hypothesis" i.e. Mother Tongue and Y Chromosomes (Science, 2011): "focusing on prehistoric language shift in already settled areas, examples worldwide show that as little as 10-20% of prehistoric male immigration can (but need not) cause a language switch, indicating an elite imposition such as may have happened with the appearance of the first farmers or metalworkers in the neolithic, bronze and iron ages", with the fact the recent "Croatian national reference Y-STR haplotype databse" (2012) with 1,100 Y-DNA samples divided in five regions of Croatia showed in eastern, southern and western 18.64-20.00%, while in central and northern 23.64-29.09% of R1a; while according to Eupedia, percentage in BiH is 15%, Serbia 16%, Bulgaria 17%, Macedonia 13.5%, and Montenegro 7.5%, which arrived with the Slavs in Middle Age (2016 research consideration). The I2a showed exactly the opposite regional percentage in Croatia, from northern and central 25.45-31.82%, western and eastern 36.82-40.00%, southern 54.55%.

Miroslav
31-05-17, 20:21
Any geneticist who worked on these research know by comparative study that Din in Balkan correspond to Dinaric anthropological type well know in anthropology... Now we can easy see results from anthropological finds in necropolis/burials from different periods to see presence of dinaric anthropology and its variation...

Can you give your source? As well I would note that anthropological research of skeletons below Stećak tombs (mainly in Herzegovina) since the 1980s concluded that they belong to clean Dinaric anthropological type, indicating non-Slavic origin, yet autochthonous Vlachian population. In this region, the contemporary population is predominantly I-M423 (over 60-70%). There really could be a correlation between the Dinaric haplogroup and anthropological type, however anthropological features are related to autosomal DNA and hence it is doubtful to some degree. It needs immediate confirmation.

Bergin
31-05-17, 22:01
You guys might want to check the new samples from the latest paper.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135616.figures-only

I think I saw a few I2a1b, but I don't know if they are DIN.
The Y-dna info is in supplementary table 1. The sample I0017 is positive for L147.2. It was fond in Sweden and dated 5700 BC. Sounds funny regarding the predicted generation time. Better check with an expert.

Note: there were a lot of unspecified I found, Balkans also, but I don't know if they couldn't test deeper or if they just didn't do it.

Miroslav
01-06-17, 07:14
You guys might want to check the new samples from the latest paper...

Already discussed at "I2a-Din in Motala12?". Until now was not found any ancient I2a1b2a1-L147.2 i.e. I-CTS10228.

Fustan
08-06-17, 13:48
Via Huno-Avars.

Fatherland
08-06-17, 16:10
Via Huno-Avars.
Huno-Avar hypothesis is the most plausible. I agree.

Fatherland
08-06-17, 16:27
For the vote: Slavs. Anything else is coping, especially with the new information.

gyms
08-06-17, 17:09
According to Hg.predictor Nevgen:
Sample no.17 is Y-I2a1b3a and belong to mtDNA H6a1
Sample no.12 iis Y-I2a1b3a and belong to mtDNA haplogroup A12.

Genetic structure of the early Hungarian conquerors inferred from mtDNA haplotypes and Y-chromosome haplogroups in a small cemetery
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00438-016-1267-z

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33054-Genetic-structure-of-the-early-Hungarian-conquerors-inferred-from-mtDNA-and-Y-DNA

Fatherland
08-06-17, 17:19
According to Hg.predictor Nevgen:
Sample no.17 is Y-I2a1b3a and belong to mtDNA H6a1
Sample no.12 iis Y-I2a1b3a and belong to mtDNA haplogroup A12.

Genetic structure of the early Hungarian conquerors inferred from mtDNA haplotypes and Y-chromosome haplogroups in a small cemetery
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00438-016-1267-z

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/33054-Genetic-structure-of-the-early-Hungarian-conquerors-inferred-from-mtDNA-and-Y-DNA

This places I2a1b-"Din" from the Ukrainian direction. IIRC its highest diversity was found there and makes sense with the Magyar migrations:

http://www.eliznik.org.uk/EastEurope/History/migration-map/hungarian-emap.GIF

Kelmendasi
08-06-17, 17:28
I2a-Din is a Slavic haplogroup everybody should know this. The Illyrian theory has been debunked also no I2a-Din has ever been found in the ancient Balkans

Kelmendasi
08-06-17, 17:33
The current information, provided by Maciamo, about Haplogroup I2a1b (M423) lacks previous connection with Illyrians and currently considers it's expansion to the Balkan to have occured only with Slavic migration. There several issues with this consideration:

1) It's solely based on contemporary frequency in East European populations.

2) It's no based on critical and empirical approach as there are not enough evidence from Middle Age, Ancient and older sources from both East and Southeast Europe.

3) The conclusion is a simple ideological construction which ignores the possibility the haplgroup was widespread in both East and Southeast Europe, as well ignores the recent archeological research which concluded that there was no mass migration of Slavs, the Balkan i.e. Yugoslavian territory was not „uninhabited“ like previously ideologically considered by the historians, which emerged from 19th century romantic-idealistic historiography, and especially that the Croats and Serbs were only small tribes (neither migrated from western Ukraine), i.e. the population ethogenesis didn't change drastically, but the political and cultural/ethnical identity changed, in a similar way like during the Roman Empire when the indigenous population was Romanized, while after the fall of WRE and consolidation of Slavic policy the indigenous population was Slavicized through the centuries.

For example I will give another chronology in which will show that the age, both formation and TMRCA, do not correspond with the Slavic expansion i.e. migration to the Balkan at all. According to Yfull Ytree v5.02 (YBP calculated from 1950):

--- I-M423 (18,006 YBP): peak of LGM 18,000 YBP
---- I-Y3104 (13,655 YBP)
----- I-L621 (11,311 YBP): beginning of interglacial Holocene
------ I-CTS4002 (6,250 YBP): it corresponds to both early Cucuteni-Trypillian kulture in Romania-Ukraine, as well early Hvar-Lisičići culture in Dalmatia, and the end of Vinča culture.
------- I-CTS10228 (5,062 YBP): partial end of Cucuteni-Trypillian culure, end of Hvar-Lisičići culture, Indo-European expansion (R1a, R1b) in Europe
-------- I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE): see below
--------- TMRCA of I-S17250 is 1,731 YBP (219 CE) according to formation age of subclades I-Y4882 (1,993 YBP), I-Y5596 (1,972 YBP), I-Y30729 (2,346 YBP), I-PH908 (1,802 YBP) and many other individual sub-mutations, with personal speculation that to the I-Y5596 or I-PG908 subclades possibly belong most I2a-Dinaric in the Balkan.
---------- The I-Y5596 has TMRCA 1,658 YBP (292 CE) i.e it mostly branches into I-Z16971 (1,886 YBP: 64 CE), which TMRCA 1,478 YBP (472 CE) which drastically varies mostly between I-A815 (1,658 YBP) and I-Y12911 (917 YBP) i.e. 292-1033 CE, while the sample ID of other two alone branch ID is 1,924 YBP and 1,416 YBP i.e. 26-534 CE.
---------- The I-PG908 (in its own „info“ has TMRCA 1,879 YBP: 71 CE) branches into I-Z16983 (1,715 YBP: 235 CE), which TMRCA of 1,321 YBP, due to small number of branch ID, is calculated with I-Y4789 (1,633 YBP) with 7 sample ID and only 1 sample of YF07968 from 1,010 YBP which gives disproportionate 1,321 YBP, thus will only consider age of I-Y4789 which further branches. Its TMRCA is 1,618 YBP (332 CE), calculated with limited 7 samples which form a formula (2,192 YBP+1,282 YBP+1,177 YBP+1821 YBP)/4.

In short, if the formation age and TMRCA are compared to historical events, like formation or migration of specific ethnical/cultural identity, then it empirically can not be used as a support i.e it absolutely no way indicates a correlation with Slavic expansion in Eastern Europe, more specifically, migration from Eeastern Europe toward Balkan between 550-750 CE.

Not only that, even the ethnogenesis origin of Slavic people, quote: „According to Polish historian Gerard Labuda, the ethnogenesis of Slavic people is the Trzciniec culture[37] from about 1700 to 1200 BC. The Milograd culture hypothesis posits that the pre-Proto-Slavs (or Balto-Slavs) originated in the seventh century BC–first century AD culture of northern Ukraine and southern Belarus. According to the Chernoles culture theory, the pre-Proto-Slavs originated in the 1025–700 BC culture of northern Ukraine and the third century BC–first century AD Zarubintsy culture. According to the Lusatian culture hypothesis, they were present in north-eastern Central Europe in the 1300–500 BC culture and the second century BC–fourth century AD Przeworsk culture“ does not correlate anyhow with the formation age and TMRCA of older subclades I-CTS10228 and I-S17250.

It can be theorized that the formation of I2a-Dinaric i.e. I-CTS10228 (3,112 BCE) was caused by some climate or social-historical events which caused the expansion, for example of the population of the Cucuteni-Trypillian and other cultures, and their change of lifestyle from mostly sedentary to nomadic or vice versa, and were assimilated by the Indo-Europeans (R1a and R1b).

However, the problem with the migration theory, according to which the populations with I2a-Dinaric originally lived in Carphatian Mountains and near Vistula River, which were slavicized making the Proto-Slavs with R1a in that area and only after then migrated to the south, is in the fact that between I-CTS10228 and I-S17250 is a time difference in formation of incredible 2,731 years or at least 136-109 generations. It indicates an extreme isolation and social-historical events which did not support the formation of new subclades, while in Europe at the time was period of Bronze Age and Iron Age. It is impossible that in such active and developing social-historical events in Western, Central and Eastern Europe, there was no mutation for almost 3,000 years in population who was allegedly located in Central-Eastern Europe. Such an extreme isolation at the time could have only happen in Southeast Europe i.e Dinaric Alps and Balkan mountains.

This difference in 2,731 years could be explained by autochthonous theory i.e. multidisciplinary by archeological research. According to Alojz Benac, who analyzed archeological and ethno-cultural elements on Western Balkan (mostly area of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Western Serbia, Kosovo, part of Dalmatia and Albania), and A. Stipčević (1991), gave the most plausible and best formulated theory on the origin of Illyrians. According to Benac there exist four stages of development in Illyrian tribal communities:

1) „Pre-Illyrians“ are basic substrate which emerged along other groups in the end of Neolithic (Baden, Kostolac, Vučedol, culture with ribbon ceramics and Bell Beaker did not serve as a substrate yet as an additional element, and their disappearance is linked to the movement of the Indo-Europeans from the east). According to Benac, the research in 1970s during this period recorded a duration of Neolithic retardation throughout the Chalcolithic or Copper Age, in which the primary role played the Hvar-Lisičići (note Brač, Korčula and Hvar 54-67%, Herzegovina c. 70% I2a-Dinaric) and the Adriatic variant of the Vučedol culture.

2) „Proto-Illyrians“ developed in the period of Indo-Europeans expansion, and in the end of Neolithic on Balkan occured „Illyrization“. According to research of the settlements and culture there was no immigration in the Bronze Age, so in the location of Glasinac can be seen uninterrupted development of culture from Bronze to Iron Age.

3) „Early-Illyrians“ developed in the end of Bronze Age at the time of so-called Dorian migration c. 1,200 BCE, and spread of Urnfield culture, which did not significantly affect the stability on the narrow part of Western Balkan or Illyrian ethnogenesis.
4) „Illyrians“ developed in the Iron Age.

According to Benac, like other archeologists, there's clear difference and existence of sub-groups among Illyrians i.e. generally one narrow area between river Aoös/Vjosë and Mat in Albania (note high E1b1b), and one wide area along the Adriatic coast and its hinterland (note high I2a-Dinaric). While in the narrow area the main role had Neolithic and Eneolithic (Copper) cultures type Maliq, elements of Baden and Kostolac, some from Epir-Macedonia, and Vučedol-Corded Ware; in the wide area is distinctively backward Hvar-Lisičići component (later substrate and part of Illyrian tribes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, e.g. Dassareti and Autariatae) and late Vučedol culture group (Ljubljansko Barje type).

The sudden formation of I-S17250 (2,331 YBP: 381 BCE) directly corresponds to the Celtic invasion/settlement of Southeastern Europe in the 4th century BCE and political degradation of the many Illyrian tribes in the hinterland, including the „the once greatest and most powerful Illyrian people“ (Strabo) tribe of Autariatae (between river Bosnia and Drina), Ardiaei (between Neretva and Albania), Dardani and so on.

Strabo, Book VII, Chapter 5: "for those who were most powerful in earlier times were utterly humbled or were obliterated, as, for example, among the Galatae the Boii and the Scordistae, and among the Illyrians the Autariatae, Ardiaei, and Dardanii, and among the Thracians the Triballi; that is, they were reduced in warfare by one another at first and then later by the Macedonians and the Romans... Now the Autariatae were once the largest and best tribe of the Illyrians. In earlier times they were continually at war with the Ardiaei over the salt-works on the common frontiers... At one time when the Autariatae had subdued the Triballi, whose territory extended from that of the Agrianes as far as the Ister, a journey of fifteen days, they held sway also over the rest of the Thracians and the Illyrians; but they were overpowered, at first by the Scordisci, and later on by the Romans, who also subdued the Scordisci themselves, after these had been in power for a long time".

At the time many tribes fought against the Macedonians, while later Roman-Illyrian wars from 3rd century BCE were only the start of end. Thing which is indicative, is that in the same period (4th century BCE) is dated the first historical, at least constant, mention of the Illyrians, and that their tribes are losing political influence due to mutual (due to various reasons) wars and better organized and developed Celts.

Those same Illyrians did not vanish in the literal sense of the Ancient chronicles, yet their ethno-political influence vanished and as such is of no interest to foreign historians or policies. After the Macedonian and Celtic events, the Roman used the situation to expand and succeeded. The Illyrians culture and hillforts are destroyed or arrogate, and they're Romanized (in the wide area, not in narrow Albania) from which emerged a mass population later known as semi-romanized Vlachs.

The TMRCA of I-S17250 (219 CE) i.e. its subclades between 332-472 CE could indicate: Constitutio Antoniniana granted citizenship in 212 CE to all free Roman Empire men, later Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 CE); invasion of the Goths and Huns which caused many social distortions and migrations, and as result end of the Roman Empire in 476 CE. There is no need that I-S17250 was located only north of Danube because these events/migrations could have influencedpopulations on both side of the Danube border. However, they do not indicate later 550-750 migration of the Slavs.

The issue with the I2a-Dinaric Slavic migration theory are, beside these age differences which do not correlate with Slavic migration, archeological research which showed that there was no mass migration nor Balkan was uninhabited, rather can be followed continuity of cultural sources between Ancient and Middle Ages. With this agree historians whether about history or identity of Illyrians and Croats (i.e. Slavs) in the Balkan (D. Džino and F. Curta), as well genetic research which are in correlation "Father Tongue hypothesis" i.e. Mother Tongue and Y Chromosomes (Science, 2011): "focusing on prehistoric language shift in already settled areas, examples worldwide show that as little as 10-20% of prehistoric male immigration can (but need not) cause a language switch, indicating an elite imposition such as may have happened with the appearance of the first farmers or metalworkers in the neolithic, bronze and iron ages", with the fact the recent "Croatian national reference Y-STR haplotype databse" (2012) with 1,100 Y-DNA samples divided in five regions of Croatia showed in eastern, southern and western 18.64-20.00%, while in central and northern 23.64-29.09% of R1a; while according to Eupedia, percentage in BiH is 15%, Serbia 16%, Bulgaria 17%, Macedonia 13.5%, and Montenegro 7.5%, which arrived with the Slavs in Middle Age (2016 research consideration). The I2a showed exactly the opposite regional percentage in Croatia, from northern and central 25.45-31.82%, western and eastern 36.82-40.00%, southern 54.55%.
It's also based on the fact that there are no I2a-Din samples ever found in the Balkans

gyms
08-06-17, 18:25
https://www.academia.edu/1246700/White_Croatia_and_the_arrival_of_the_Croats_an_int erpretation_of_Constantine_Porphyrogenitus_on_the_ oldest_Dalmatian_history_in_Early_Medieval_Europe_ 19_2011_204-31

What if I2a1b-Din is Onogur-Bulgarian?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs

From the 8th century, the Byzantine sources often mention the Onoğurs in close connection with the Bulgars. Agathon (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agathon) (early 8th century) wrote about the nation of Onoğurs Bulğars. Nikephoros I (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikephoros_I_of_Constantinople) (early 9th century) noted that Kubrat (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubrat) was the lord of the Onoğundurs; his contemporary Theophanes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theophanes_the_Confessor) referred to them as Onoğundur–Bulğars. Kubrat successfully revolted against the Avars and founded the Old Great Bulgaria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Great_Bulgaria) (Magna Bulgaria[27] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs#cite_note-FOOTNOTEFiedler2008152-28)), also known as Onoğundur–Bulğars state, or Patria Onoguria in the Ravenna Cosmography (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravenna_Cosmography).[28] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGolden1992245-29)[29] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGolden2011144-30)[21] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs#cite_note-Origin-22) Constantine VII (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_VII) (mid-10th century) remarked that the Bulğars formerly called themselves Onoğundurs.[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onogurs#cite_note-FOOTNOTEGolden1992102-31)

Miroslav
09-06-17, 06:16
There's a difference between Huns and Avars, the relation between I2a-Din and Turkic or Hungarian tribes is a simple nonsense and not worth commenting. Think before you post such "theories" :laughing:


I2a-Din is a Slavic haplogroup everybody should know this. The Illyrian theory has been debunked also no I2a-Din has ever been found in the ancient Balkans

No debunk, still now evidence it is a Slavic haplogroup, the argument about no I2a-Din sample from ancient Balkans is uncritical because no ancient sample with the haplogroup was found whatsoever in whole Europe.

gyms
09-06-17, 09:34
There is absolutely no evidence for the Slavic origin of I2a1b.
But of course,if you repeat a lie often enoug,it becomes the truth.

Fatherland
09-06-17, 11:44
I2a1b-"Din" is higher amount in Eastern Europe(Ukraine-Poland area) than it is in the Balkans. Not to speak of its high diversity there while Balkans has a recent influx of it with low diversity.

The only I2 found in the Ancient times is from Iron Gates(Romania/Serbia) border & Bulgaria is I2a2, now in modern populations:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

This is completely absent in majority of the South Slavs, which strongly suggests most South Slavs are a recent transplant to the Balkans through the low-diversity I2a1b-"Din".

Fatherland
09-06-17, 11:53
There is absolutely no evidence for the Slavic origin of I2a1b.
But of course,if you repeat a lie often enoug,it becomes the truth.
Looking at most maps, Slavs in the Northeastern Europe are a combination of R1a & I2a1b-"Din" in majority.

gyms
09-06-17, 12:33
I have never seen any ancient slavic I2a1b yet.So what's the evidence?

Fatherland
09-06-17, 12:37
I have never seen any ancient slavic I2a1b yet.So what's the evidence?
Older clades are found in Ukrainians and Poles.

I already linked the Magyar conquerors map and they passed through the entirety of Ukraine.

Milan.M
09-06-17, 12:50
I2a1b-"Din" is higher amount in Eastern Europe(Ukraine-Poland area) than it is in the Balkans. Not to speak of its high diversity there while Balkans has a recent influx of it with low diversity.

The only I2 found in the Ancient times is from Iron Gates(Romania/Serbia) border & Bulgaria is I2a2, now in modern populations:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

This is completely absent in majority of the South Slavs, which strongly suggests most South Slavs are a recent transplant to the Balkans through the low-diversity I2a1b-"Din".
8753–8351 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia I2a1
5780-5640 calBCE Koros_Hungary_ I2a1
4491-4357 calBCE Lengyel_LN Hungary I2a1
6000-5100 BCE Latvia_HG I2a1
6000-5100 BCE Latvia_HG I2a1
8280-7967 calBCE Vasil'evka .. Ukraine I2a1
3360-3086 calBCE Esperstedt Germany I2a1b1a1
2900-2679 calBCE El Mirador Cave, Atapuerca, Burgos Spain I2a1a1a
5310-5078 calBCE Iberia_EN I2a1b1


6655-6225 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia I2
7340-6640 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Romania I2

Illyrian friend come down.

This are just some i collected from the recent paper,i believe there were more.

Fatherland
09-06-17, 13:02
8753–8351 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia I2a1
5780-5640 calBCE Koros_Hungary_ I2a1
4491-4357 calBCE Lengyel_LN Hungary I2a1
6000-5100 BCE Latvia_HG I2a1
6000-5100 BCE Latvia_HG I2a1
8280-7967 calBCE Vasil'evka .. Ukraine I2a1
3360-3086 calBCE Esperstedt Germany I2a1b1a1
2900-2679 calBCE El Mirador Cave, Atapuerca, Burgos Spain I2a1a1a
5310-5078 calBCE Iberia_EN I2a1b1


6655-6225 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia I2
7340-6640 calBCE Iron_Gates_HG Romania I2

Illyrian friend come down.

This are just some i collected from the recent paper,i believe there were more.
The minority of I2a1b-L621 individuals negative for L147.2 are all found around eastern Poland, Belarus and western Ukraine, suggesting that this is where this lineage survived since the Chalcolithic. The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis, considering that it takes a few centuries before one man can have enough male descendants to start having an impact at the scale of a population. This I2-L147.2 ancestor would have such an impact on the burgeoning Early Slavic population, still small 2,300 years ago, but booming.


From Eastern Europe 1800~ years ago.


Ken Nordtvedt has more authority in this than anyone else. You can debate with him.

I2a1b-"Din" is just a new clade with low diversity in the Balkans and high in Northeastern Europe.

Milan.M
09-06-17, 13:06
The minority of I2a1b-L621 individuals negative for L147.2 are all found around eastern Poland, Belarus and western Ukraine, suggesting that this is where this lineage survived since the Chalcolithic. The I2a1b-L147.2 subclade seems to have expanded very fast from 1900 years ago, which is concordant with the timing of the Slavic ethnogenesis, considering that it takes a few centuries before one man can have enough male descendants to start having an impact at the scale of a population. This I2-L147.2 ancestor would have such an impact on the burgeoning Early Slavic population, still small 2,300 years ago, but booming.


From Eastern Europe 1800~ years ago.


Ken Nordtvedt has more authority in this than anyone else. You can debate with him.
Please spare me from your wishful thinking even more from amateurs such is Ken Nordvedt a man specializing a theory of gravity.I'll start quoting now Anatoly Klyosov to see what he got. :D

Both have nothing with genetics and are complete charlatans i don't even know why people even rely on them.

But you said that there was no I2a1 in the Balkans

Fatherland
09-06-17, 13:09
Pure fantasy speculation from Serbo-Croatian parts. Fakedonian too, disregarding renowned geneticist such as Ken Nordtvedt, for their own personal agendas.


FYROMians are a mix of AlbanoVlach-Bulgarians combined with some Turkic admixture. As that is what you are so I heard, why are you Üskubians trying to steal Greek history?

Milan.M
09-06-17, 13:13
Right Albos are the most ancient and first inhabitants in the Balkans,and are there since the dino's here's a proof
https://scontent-vie1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/12540945_1717741148442163_1091158022945636166_n.pn g?oh=bb618483ad7d75540dde3b22aa06e754&oe=59D7E1BD

LABERIA
09-06-17, 13:25
Where is our goddess of wisdom when we need her?

gyms
09-06-17, 14:13
The Genomic History of Southeastern Europe - Mathieson, Reich, et al.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135616

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10564-The-Genomic-History-of-Southeastern-Europe-Mathieson-Reich-et-al (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10564-The-Genomic-History-of-Southeastern-Europe-Mathieson-Reich-et-al)

...............................................
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG_brother_of_I4880 Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4a I2a2a
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b2
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b2
.................................................. .........................

Fatherland
09-06-17, 14:16
The Genomic History of Southeastern Europe - Mathieson, Reich, et al.
http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/05/09/135616

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10564-The-Genomic-History-of-Southeastern-Europe-Mathieson-Reich-et-al (http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?10564-The-Genomic-History-of-Southeastern-Europe-Mathieson-Reich-et-al)

...............................................
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG_brother_of_I4880 Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4a I2a2a
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b2
6200-5900 BCE Iron_Gates_HG Serbia U4b1b1 I2a2a1b2
.................................................. .........................

I2a2 in modern populations:

http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup-I2b.gif

Nothing Slavic about it.

Milan.M
10-06-17, 13:48
Pure fantasy speculation from Serbo-Croatian parts. Fakedonian too, disregarding renowned geneticist such as Ken Nordtvedt, for their own personal agendas.


FYROMians are a mix of AlbanoVlach-Bulgarians combined with some Turkic admixture. As that is what you are so I heard, why are you Üskubians trying to steal Greek history?

Shiptar better check your Circassian admixture.

Emrox
29-06-17, 17:44
Just thought I would throw this out there…

With recent results suggesting that Neolithic Britons were at least predominantly I2a, I read this modern distribution in an entirely different way. For me, the modern distribution of I2a appears very highly correlated to mining and and trading of tin, c3300-2000BCE. As such, distribution may be best explained by the introduction of I2a along tin trading routes from NW Europe to the Black sea (Rhine -> Danube), the Adriatic (Rhine then across the Alps to the Po) and central Italy (Rhine -> Mediterarian coast -> Tiber -> Foggia -> Greece).

In this scenario, I2a – DIN may have been initially occurred and then been passed to local populations in the Balkans by early tin traders from Germany or Britain at trading posts on the Danube. The date of 3100BC works very nicely for this.

Although the original source of the tin for the European Bronze age is generally framed as a debate between Erzgebirge vs. Conrwall, it is also worth noting that other ‘hot spots’ in the modern I2a2 distribution (e.g. Skelleftia in Sweden and Argur-Dessus in the Pyranees) are today both areas with operational tin mines.

stoningbull54
25-07-17, 16:00
Today I was looking at a map of the distribution of haplgroup I2a1 in Europe when I made an interesting discovery. According to Serbian legend and the Byzantine Chronicles, the Serbs left an area known as "White Serbia" under the leadership of the Unknown Archon to migrate into the Balkans. This archon was said to be the son of Knez Dervan who ruled over an area of East Germany in the area which is today inhabited by Sorbs. If we examine a map of Dervan's realm and compare it to I2a1 frequency, we can clearly an elevated concentration of I2a1 in the area of his former realm:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.png
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

Johane Derite
25-07-17, 17:43
Today I was looking at a map of the distribution of haplgroup I2a1 in Europe when I made an interesting discovery. According to Serbian legend and the Byzantine Chronicles, the Serbs left an area known as "White Serbia" under the leadership of the Unknown Archon to migrate into the Balkans. This archon was said to be the son of Knez Dervan who ruled over an area of East Germany in the area which is today inhabited by Sorbs. If we examine a map of Dervan's realm and compare it to I2a1 frequency, we can clearly an elevated concentration of I2a1 in the area of his former realm:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Dervan.png
http://cache.eupedia.com/images/content/Haplogroup_I2a.gif

This is very interesting

ihype02
10-08-17, 17:37
If it was the Slavs it puts things on perspective.

Wonomyro
10-08-17, 21:03
I believe that two previously mentioned Hungarian samples deserve some attention. As far as I know there are only 3 published I2a-M423 samples form early middle ages of which two belong to Hungarian conquerors.

There was an interesting conversation about the subject occured on another thread:

gyms:


Very interesting.According to the results on the Y-DNA Haplogroup Predictor Nevgen the two I2a are I2a1b3a.But they are not relatives.Simple no.12 is Din South,simple no.17 is Din North. "

Kristiina:


Maybe the fathers of these R1b and I2a guys became allies of Hungarians and as a confirmation of their loyalty married their daughters. In historical times, this kind of political marriages were very frequent among ruling classes.

A 10th century Byzantine source "De Administrando Imperio", in chapter 30, confirms what Kristiina said:


But the Croats at that time were dwelling beyond Bavaria, where the Belocroats are now. From them split off a family of five brothers, Kloukas and Lobelos and Kosentzis and Mouchlo and Chrobatos, and two sisters, Touga and Bouga, who came with their folk to Dalmatia (...)

The rest of the Croats stayed over against Francia, and are called Belocroats, that is, white Croats, and have their own prince; they are subject to Otto, the great king of Francia, or Saxony, and are unbaptized, and intermarry and are friendly with the Turks (Magyars).

The area where the ancient Hungarians were found is where some historians locate white Croatia.

ihype02
25-08-17, 20:39
Before the Slavic migration (570 AD-7th century) there have been 3 centuries of other "Barbarian Invasions".
From 250 AD on ,several waves of different people migrated West and South:
Goths (Visigoths,Ostrogoths, Vandals),Avars,Huns,Eruli,Kutriguri,Alamans etc etc etc.

The effects of invasions,destructions of cities and towns,killings and slavery were tremendous.
Northern Balkans are described by Byzantine chronographers as a deserted land.

ihype02
28-08-17, 19:37
I wish there was a map regarding I2a-din specifically.

Angela
28-08-17, 20:29
Before the Slavic migration (570 AD-7th century) there have been 3 centuries of other "Barbarian Invasions".
From 250 AD on ,several waves of different people migrated West and South:
Goths (Visigoths,Ostrogoths, Vandals),Avars,Huns,Eruli,Kutriguri,Alamans etc etc etc.

The effects of invasions,destructions of cities and towns,killings and slavery were tremendous.
Northern Balkans are described by Byzantine chronographers as a deserted land.

One of the things modern genetics has taught us is that we should take the opinions of historians, especially ancient historians, with a large grain of salt. In the first case, they had no way of knowing the genetic effect of various wars and migrations, basing everything on speculation, and in the latter case, the "historians", even when they knew anything other than what was transpiring in their own immediate area, may have had agendas of one kind or another. One common example is the obviously inflated numbers of various armies or the number of slaves, etc.

Just take the example of the Mycenaeans. Up until the day the recent Lazaridis et al paper came out people were pontificating everywhere how "steppe" like they would be, given that this has always been the exemplar of the Bronze Age "Indo-European" culture, and speculations about the "huge" waves of steppe people who would have been pouring in. Turns out the "steppe" portion was 4-16% or 13-18% depending on the method used, so perhaps somewhere around 15%.

As to I2a-"Din" and subclades, wouldn't FTDNA have maps?

There's also this general one on I2a2 (old I2b). Does more recent data change the picture substantially?
http://p2.storage.canalblog.com/22/33/102164/76774684.jpg

ihype02
29-08-17, 09:26
I am not really sure if this is the right place to post it:
As of the beginning of the 6th century there was in fact no significant Slavic presence anywhere in the territory of modern Russia except the province of Bryansk while the Slavic core embraced contemporary western and northern Ukraine, southern Belarus and south-eastern Poland. The territory north of the Slavs was dominated by various Baltic tribes who occupied significant area that included all of the contemporary Lithuania, most of Belarus, southern half of Latvia, all of the modern province of Smolensk and partially the provinces of Moscow (western half) and Pskov (southern districts) as well as the historical East Prussia now shared by Poland and Russian enclave of Kaliningrad. All the rest of today’s central and northern Russia was the realm of Finnic and Finno-Ugric tribes.
Brzezinski, Richard; Mielczarek, Mariusz (2002). The Sarmatians, 600 BC-AD 450. Osprey Publishing. p. 39. [...] Indeed, it is now accepted that the Sarmatians merged in with pre-Slavic populations.
Adams, Douglas Q. (1997). Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. Taylor & Francis. p. 523. [...] In their Ukrainian and Polish homeland the Slavs were intermixed and at times overlain by Germanic speakers (the Goths) and by Iranian speakers (Scythians, Sarmatians, Alans) in a shifting array of tribal and national configurations.
Atkinson, Dorothy; Dallin, Alexander; Warshofsky Lapidus, Gail, eds. (1977). Women in Russia. Stanford University Press. p. 3. [...] Ancient accounts link the Amazons with the Scythians and the Sarmatians, who successively dominated the south of Russia for a millennium extending back to the seventh century B.C. The descendants of these peoples were absorbed by the Slavs who came to be known as Russians.
Slovene Studies. 9–11. Society for Slovene Studies. 1987. p. 36. [...] For example, the ancient Scythians, Sarmatians (amongst others), and many other attested but now extinct peoples were assimilated in the course of history by Proto-Slavs.
"Between the sixth and seventh centuries, large parts of Europe came to be controlled by Slavs, a process less understood and documented than that of the Germanic ethnogenesis in the west. Yet the effects of Slavicization were far more profound". Geary (2003, p. 144)

ihype02
29-08-17, 12:13
One of the things modern genetics has taught us is that we should take the opinions of historians, especially ancient historians, with a large grain of salt. In the first case, they had no way of knowing the genetic effect of various wars and migrations, basing everything on speculation
See the difference between upper Balkans and Anatolia:

9088

Angela
29-08-17, 15:16
^^None of your attachments open up, so it's impossible to respond.

ihype02
29-08-17, 15:22
http://www.eupedia.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=9088.................. ......

ihype02
29-08-17, 16:45
Aromanians from Andon Poçi, Albania[64] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#cite_note-Bosch2006-64)



I haplogroup is over 40%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#Genetic_studies
As we see Vlachs are extremely diverse.

ihype02
29-08-17, 22:17
The Aromuns, presumably descended from the Roman-era population of the Balkans, have over 20% of I2a, more than the Slavic-speaking Macedonian neighbours.
Macedonians have roughly 30% I2a-"din". As for Aromanians, they are extremely diverse and have absorbed lot of migrants. For example R1A in Aromanians scores 21% (Štip RoM)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aromanians#Genetic_studies

Garrick
31-08-17, 16:41
Before the Slavic migration (570 AD-7th century) there have been 3 centuries of other "Barbarian Invasions". From 250 AD on ,several waves of different people migrated West and South: Goths (Visigoths,Ostrogoths, Vandals),Avars,Huns,Eruli,Kutriguri,Alamans etc etc etc. The effects of invasions,destructions of cities and towns,killings and slavery were tremendous. Northern Balkans are described by Byzantine chronographers as a deserted land.

Really Huns made destruction in the Balkans, historical sources confirm it.

For many others we should vague because they brought new things, inventions, progress, they mixed with locals and their whole contribution can be positive. Celts are one good example for it from 4th BCE. In period which you mention for example Goths contributed culture and history, it could be incorrect to call them destructors.

Also many tribes and people were subject of "ethnic engineering" where imperial rulers settled (or deported) whole or big part of population. Bastarnae for example are that case and when they arrived to the Balkans more times they mixed with local Thracians/Dacians during long period and became part of local population, therefore they were constructive (not destructive) element.

ihype02
13-09-17, 10:57
I'm surprised that Paleolithic continuity is getting such a strong hearing so far. I have a strong feeling that an ancestor clade of I2a-Din passed through the Balkans or at least the Carpathian Basin, quite possibly I* or early I2* or I2a* or even IJ. But I2a-Din is waaay down the SNP tree, with none of its cousin clades having their centers of diversity in the Balkans. Looking at Nordtvedt's tree (http://knordtvedt.home.bresnan.net/Tree%20and%20Map%20for%20Hg%20I.pdf) makes it clear how young the clade is. And the "S" cluster, which is more common in the Balkans than the "N" cluster, is even younger than the clade as a whole.

So Paleolithic continuity requires either: (1) The STR dating is unreliable to the point of being junk, and the date is wrong nearly tenfold. Or (2) a massive bottleneck down to clusters N and S by ca. 2500 years ago, followed by an expansion of only N outside of the Balkans, followed by another bottleneck of S, which then expanded in the Classical Age or later (maybe with the Illyrians)? (1) seems very unlikely to me and (2) doesn't seem to fit what we know about the history of the region or the other haplogroups in the region.

What migration pattern does fit the cluster dating? Well, an expansion out of a small subset of an expanding population from the North during the 1st millennium CE would fit it. Sounds like the Slavs, or at least a Southerly subset of them that mixed with I2a-Din people who could have been there well before the R1a carriers.

Sparkley, how do you explain:
1.) The contrast of northern Slavs and Southern Slavs: the high frequencies of R1a in northern Slavs and low frequencies in southern ones. Considering they originated from mostly similar regions.
2.) The idea of some pagan tribes which knew little in antiquity overruning nearly the whole Eastern Europe. Do you have any demographic evidence? The only thing that comes to my mind is the plague of Justian which killed off the bulk of population in Eastern Mediterranean.

hrvat22
13-09-17, 16:50
The I2a with mutation I-S17250 in the Balkan is White Croatian origin.

https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31539-Genetics-confirm-migration-of-White-Croats-to-Croatia

Garrick
05-11-17, 02:05
The I2a with mutation I-S17250 in the Balkan is White Croatian origin.

https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31539-Genetics-confirm-migration-of-White-Croats-to-Croatia

How many times you will say it.

You saw what scientists write, experts of Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of the Austrian Academy of Science.

Some forum cannot help against science, and Eupedia fosters science, and science enable progress.

hrvat22
05-11-17, 09:37
How many times you will say it.

You saw what scientists write, experts of Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of the Austrian Academy of Science.

Some forum cannot help against science, and Eupedia fosters science, and science enable progress.

Are you joking with me.?
experts of Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of the Austrian Academy of Science. They are not stronger than genetics, I believe only genetics and historical records that this genetics confirms, everything else is a crystal ball or grandma Vanga fairytale.

Garrick
05-11-17, 16:08
Are you joking with me.?

No.

Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of the Austrian Academy of Science should be respected.



Dr Francesco Borri is stronger than genetics, hahahaha he did not write DAI and his comment is as good as your comment

You can write what you want but laughing to scientists is wrong approach.

Every amateur who underestimates scientists and experts should think about words of Bertrand Russell:

"What science cannot discover, mankind cannot know. "

Wonomyro
05-11-17, 16:32
No. Institute of Medieval Research, Vienna, a department of the Austrian Academy of Science should be respected. You can write what you want but laughing to scientists is wrong approach. Every amateur who underestimates scientists and experts should think about words of Bertrand Russell: "What science cannot discover, mankind cannot know. " How much do they pay to you? Hopefully, there are other very good scientists who have more interdisciplinary approach what makes them see things much clearer then Dr. Too Often Mentioned does.

Angela
08-11-17, 03:59
I'm not going to say it again. The mutations about which you argue have yet to be found in any ancient samples. Until they are this is just nationalistic chest beating and speculation.

Wonomyro
08-11-17, 13:09
I'm not going to say it again. The mutations about which you argue have yet to be found in any ancient samples. Until they are this is just nationalistic chest beating and speculation.

(My post was the last one so I assume that your comment was directed to me).

Well, I do not argue about the mutation itself (you may check my posts). I just support the theory that there was a significant depopulation in province of Dalmatia during the migration period, and that a repopulation took place afterwards, as all three earliest historical sources state.

Crya
09-11-17, 22:28
(My post was the last one so I assume that your comment was directed to me).Well, I do not argue about the mutation itself (you may check my posts). I just support the theory that there was a significant depopulation in province of Dalmatia during the migration period, and that a repopulation took place afterwards, as all three earliest historical sources state.Miroslav mentioned Tibor Zivkovic and his work about Balkan history as a true source. Tibor said that only 1-3% of nobles came during 6-7th century. As I've told before, the "great" Slavic migration to the Balkan have never happened!Mario Alinei said:"In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to theNorth from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, themost important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which isentirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –andcertainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see,then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion that involves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity,without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case of underestimation of one’s own science. Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following the traditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved alsothe Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there has been a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards. A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between the idea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existing languages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormous technological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people, have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. The ideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a Copper Age IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the fact that research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996,2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highly civilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe? What and where would the pre Indo-European substrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Slovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – a phantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientific thinking."

Crya
09-11-17, 23:18
(My post was the last one so I assume that your comment was directed to me).Well, I do not argue about the mutation itself (you may check my posts). I just support the theory that there was a significant depopulation in province of Dalmatia during the migration period, and that a repopulation took place afterwards, as all three earliest historical sources state.Great Slavic migration have never happened. Tibor Zivkovic said that only 1-3% of the nobles came to the Balkan during the so-called the great migration. I will cite Mario Alinei:In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to theNorth from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, themost important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which isentirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –andcertainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see,then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion thatinvolves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity,without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case ofunderestimation of one’s own science.Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following thetraditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved alsothe Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there hasbeen a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards. A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between theidea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existinglanguages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormoustechnological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people,have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. Theideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a CopperAge IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the factthat research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996,2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highlycivilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe? What and where would the preIndo-Europeansubstrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia andSlovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – aphantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientificthinking.

Angela
09-11-17, 23:41
Great Slavic migration have never happened. Tibor Zivkovic said that only 1-3% of the nobles came to the Balkan during the so-called the great migration. I will cite Mario Alinei:In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to theNorth from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, themost important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which isentirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –andcertainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see,then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion thatinvolves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity,without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case ofunderestimation of one’s own science.Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following thetraditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved alsothe Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there hasbeen a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards. A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between theidea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existinglanguages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormoustechnological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people,have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. Theideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a CopperAge IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the factthat research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996,2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highlycivilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe? What and where would the preIndo-Europeansubstrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia andSlovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – aphantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientificthinking.

Unless you can produce recent, scientific, genetic evidence this is all wild speculation and unworthy of consideration. Please google "newbies" thread and start reading.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 06:54
Great Slavic migration have never happened. Tibor Zivkovic said that only 1-3% of the nobles came to the Balkan during the so-called the great migration. I will cite Mario Alinei:In short, if such an enormous expansion of the Slavs both to the South and to theNorth from their alleged homeland in Middle-Eastern Europe had really taken place, themost important evidence we should expect to find would be archaeological. Which isentirely missing. Just as we miss any discussion of this point in Mallory’s book –andcertainly not by accident, given the fact that Mallory is an archaeologist. I fail to see,then, how an archaeologist can advance the hypothesis of a massive expansion thatinvolves half of Europe, and is capable of entirely changing its linguistic identity,without the slightest archaeological evidence: unless it is a curious case ofunderestimation of one’s own science.Another fundamental objection to this thesis lies in the fact that, following thetraditional scenario, we would have to assume that this ‘great migration’ involved alsothe Southern Slavic area: an absolute impossibility, as we have just seen. If there hasbeen a ‘migration’, it must have proceded from South northwards. A third, fundamental objection to this thesis is the contradiction between theidea of a medieval migration and the total disappearance of the presumed pre-existinglanguages. Not even modern mass migration and colonization, despite the enormoustechnological and cultural difference between the migrants and the indigenous people,have caused the total extinction of all autocthonous languages in the New World. Theideal of the extinction of all alleged pre-Indo-European languages because of a CopperAge IE migration is already hard enough to admit, given the same reason, plus the factthat research on pre-Indo-European has never produced any serious result (Alinei 1996,2000). How can we accept such an idea for the Early Middle Ages, and for the highlycivilized areas of Southern Eastern prehistoric Europe? What and where would the preIndo-Europeansubstrate be in Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia andSlovenia? Unless we associate this late migration to a gigantic genocide – aphantascientific hypothesis – this hypothesis does not belong to serious scientificthinking.

You have genetics and prove it, until then it's a dead letter on paper.

Bachus
10-11-17, 08:24
The I2a with mutation I-S17250 in the Balkan is White Croatian origin.

https://yfull.com/tree/I-S17250

http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/31539-Genetics-confirm-migration-of-White-Croats-to-Croatia

Not true, you're talking BS, Croats which came to the Balkans were not Slavs, they were Turkic tribe.

hrvat22
10-11-17, 10:55
Not true, you're talking BS, Croats which came to the Balkans were not Slavs, they were Turkic tribe.

You have genetics and prove it, until then it is fairy tale from crystal ball.

Fatherland
10-11-17, 14:42
What is the final conclusion? This trainwreck of a thread has derailed far too many times.